- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner is a private University, inter alia running several courses, the petitioners have approached this Court, inter-alia seeking the following relief: "(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notification bearing No. 3572/71-2-2016-81/2016 dated 22 August 2016, issued by the State Government; (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notification No. 3740/71-2-2016-162/2016 dated 2.9.2016 issued by the Medical Education Department ( Section-2), U.P. Government".
(3.) It is contended by Sri Anurag Khanna, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that the law and facts sought to be determined in the present petition is covered by the judgement dated 15 September 2016, rendered by Division Bench of this Court in a bunch of petition being Misc. Bench No. 20575 of 2016 (U.P. Unaided Medical Colleges Welfare Association, Bareilly Vs. Union of India and others), wherein, the following order has been passed: "In view of the above discussion we order as under:- (i) Subject to what has been held hereinabove, the impugned orders prescribing a Centralized Counselling for all institutions for admission to MBBS/BDS medical courses in the State based on NEET 2016, do not suffer from any error. (ii) Minority institutions shall be allowed to admit the students of their community based on Centralized Counselling held by the State on the basis of NEET 2016, to the extent permissible, but, without deviating from the merit of such students as reflected in the NEET list 2016, so as to sub-serve their minority status under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India. (iii) Clause 1 and 2 of the order dated 02.09.2016 shall not be given effect in their present form, however, considering the laudable object behind it, which the State wants to achieve in discharge of its constitutional obligation, if it chooses to prescribe subsidized seats for the poor it may do so, but, subject to following conditions:- (a) it should fund the subsidy itself unless it is able to devise any other legally and constitutionally permissible means of doing so; (b) in such an eventuality, it shall ensure that poor students are admitted against subsidized seats without compromising merit i.e. only when such students are within the zone of merit, in the normal course, for exercising his choice during counselling as per NEET list 2016 and not otherwise; (c) reservation on the basis of residence for the purposes of subsidized seats, if the occasion so arises, shall be restricted to 50% of the seats excluding the All India Quota seats but including the seats in Government institutions and the number/percentage of such seats reserved in private institutions shall be re-fixed accordingly.; The State may if it chooses reformulate its policy as aforesaid. If not, then clause 1 and 2 of the order dated 02.09.2016 shall be treated as inoperative. (iv)As we have held clause 1 and 2 of the order of the State dated 02.09.2016 to be unsustainable in its present form and as they provide the basic principle and formula of fee fixation, for seats in private institutions, therefore, unless the State reformulates its policy as aforesaid, the orders passed by the fee Committee based thereon, in respect of individual institutions can also not be sustained nor given effect, and are accordingly quashed, therefore, subject to the above, the committee shall refix the fee chargeable by such institutions, accordingly. It is made clear that we have not considered the other grounds of challenge to the decision of fee committee raised in separate writ petitions by individual petitioners and all such pleas shall be open to the parties, if the occasion so arises. (v)As a consequence of the above Ist round of counselling, which has not yet been finalized, is required to be held again. It is therefore provided that the same shall be done with expedition and the admission process shall be completed, including the exercise/steps, if any, referred at point no. (iii) hereinabove, with the same expedition, keeping in mind the time schedule in regulation 7(6AA) of the Regulations, 1997 but no later than 25.09.2016. In the end we would like to record our appreciation for the valuable assistance extended by all the learned counsel appearing for the parties which has facilitated the rendering of this judgment today, considering the time crunch. Subject to the above, all the writ petitions are partly allowed".;