- (1.) This is the story of a MBBS doctor who reached so close to fulfill her dream of pursuing Post Graduate course, received communication through email dated 31.05.2016 from the Central Institute of Psychiatry, Kanke, Ranchi for her selection in Diploma in Psychological Medicine course, yet, denied admission for no fault of her. When she approached the Writ Court, referring to the timeschedule fixed vide Notification dated 22.01.2016 which was approved by the Supreme Court in "Ashish Ranjan & Ors. Vs. Union of India and others", the Writ Petition was dismissed. How the Writ Court has gone wrong, is the issue raised in the instant Letters Patent Appeal.
(2.) Before adverting to the rival contentions, necessary facts of the case are summerised hereunder; (i) The appellantwrit petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "petitioner") seeking admission in Post Graduate course appeared in All India Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination, 2016. She appeared for the Mopup counseling at the Central Institute of Psychiatry, Kanke, Ranchi on 26.05.2016, which was the date notified by the respondentInstitute and she was placed in the waiting list at Sl. No.2. On 31.05.2016, she received a communication through email from the Institute at about 15.15 hrs. about her selection in the MD/DPM course. The petitioner, who was at Chirim in Chhatisgarh, somehow reached the Institute at about 10 pm, however, since the office was closed by that time she reported at the Institute on 01.06.2016. She submitted an application to the Director, Central Institute of Psychiatry to allow her to take admission, however, citing the decision in W.P.(C) No.76 of 2015 she was denied admission. In her application dated 01.06.2016, she asserted that distance between her native place and Ranchi is about 400 kms. and she kept ready bond by the local Notary. The Writ Petition was taken up for hearing on 17.06.2016, when to enable the learned ASGI appearing for the Union of India to seek instructions and file response, the matter was posted for 24.06.2016. On the next two dates of hearing, the matter was adjourned, but not at the instance of the petitioner. (ii) Before the Writ Court, the petitioner pleading no fault attributable to her and relying on decision in Asha Vs. PT. B. D. Sharma University of Health Sciences and Ors., 2012 7 SCC 389, contended that the action of the respondentUniversity is arbitrary and contrary to the true spirit of the decision of the Supreme Court. The respondentInstitute however, asserted that after Mopup counseling was held on 26.05.2016 offer letters were issued to the selected candidates to join the course on or before 28.05.2016, and out of 5 selected candidates for Diploma in Psychological Medicine course only 4 took admission on 30.05.2016; 29.05.2016 being a Sunday, the Institute cancelled the offer for admission to the 5th candidate and the vacant seat under unreserved category was offered to one Dr. Sankesh Kumar Singh, who was in the wait list at Sl. No.1, however, he also did not join the course and communicated his refusal through letter dated 31.05.2016 in the afternoon. It was thereafter only, that the vacant seat was offered to the petitioner on 31.05.2016. In view of the deadline approved by the Supreme Court in Ashish Ranjan case, the respondentInstitute expressed its inability to admit the petitioner in breach of the aforesaid timeschedule. As noticed above, the Writ Petition was dismissed.
(3.) Assailing the impugned order dated 04.07.2016 passed by the Writ Court, Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Writ Court has completely overlooked the circumstances under which the petitioner was directed to join the course on 31.05.2016 itself. The learned counsel contends that for no fault of the petitioner, if the cutoff date is used as a weapon to deny her admission, it would completely ruin her professional career; merit of the petitioner stands admitted and reflected in communication dated 31.05.2016 from the Institute. Mr. Dubey, in support of his contention, has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in case Asha versus PT. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences and Others, 2012 7 SCC 389 and drawn the attention of the Court to para 32 of the said judgment. He also relied upon a judgment of the Orissa High Court in case "Snehlata Jagati versus Convenor, PG (Medical/Dental) Selection Committee, Odisha & Others" rendered in W.P.(C) No.20557 of 2013 in which the view taken by the High Court was subsequently affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 37499 of 2013 vide order dated 03.01.2014 [Photostat copies produced and attached at the proper place].;