M.N.Bhandari, J. - (1.) THE petitioner appeared in entrance test for admission in MBBS/DBS course. The result thereupon was declared followed by counselling for admission in the medical courses named above. The petitioner could not appear in first counseling due to ill health as was suffering from typhoid. He submitted choices of Medical Colleges on -line. The respondents did not consider on -line choices given by petitioner. He then appeared in second counselling but was not allowed, thereby candidature of the petitioner was not considered. The respondents notified third counselling to be scheduled on 10.09.2013 but it has further been postponed. Prayer is to allow the petitioner to participate in the counselling as he is not only OBC candidate but disabled thus entitled to the benefit of reservation. I have considered the submission made by learned counsel for petitioner and perused the record.
(2.) IT is no doubt the petitioner appeared in entrance test for admission in MBBS/BDS course and remained successful having obtained minimum percentile. The respondents called first counselling however petitioner failed to appear and there is nothing on record to show an information to the respondents for absence of the petitioner due to medical reasons. Since petitioner did not appear in first counselling, he was not allowed to participate in second counselling as it is allowed to those who had participated in the first counselling and others who not were not for the counselling. Mere submission of choices of Medical Colleges on -line is not sufficient but physical presence in counselling along with the document is required. The fact further remains that admission in Medical Colleges has to be made as per schedule given by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mridul Dhar (Minor) & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors., reported in : (2005) 2 SCC 65 and it has further held that only two counselling be conducted for admission thereby third counselling is not permissible. As and when extended counseling is conducted, it can be with the permission of Hon'ble Apex Court and not otherwise. I find that after second counselling, no order has been passed by Hon'ble Apex Court for further counselling, though application may be pending. Learned counsel for petitioner referred the judgment in the case of Asha vs. Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, reported in : (2012) 7 SCC 389 wherein admissions beyond the deadline given by Hon'ble Apex Court are permitted if there was no default on the part of candidate. The case in hand is not of the aforesaid nature, rather default lies with the petitioner for non -appearance in the first counselling. Thus, it cannot be said that denial of admission to the medical course is due to unexplained reason by the respondents.
(3.) IN view of the discussion made above, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief at this stage. However, if Hon'ble Apex Court passes order to permit extended counselling, the petitioner would be at liberty to seek revival of the writ petition. The writ petition so as stay application are accordingly dismissed.;