JAMMU: In a petition filed by Omer Bashir Itoo challenging the selection and admission of Shagun Mahajan and others in MS Surgery and MS Anesthesia under NRI quote in ASCOMs, Justice Janak Raj Kotwal of J and K High Court Jammu Wing on Wednesday after hearing battery of lawyers, quashed the selection and admission of respondent No. 3 (Shagun Mahajan) vide No. ASCOMS/FS/NRI/501 dated 18th April, 2014 pursuant to Admission Notice No. Assoc/CET/M&D/205 dated 11th February, 2014 with direction to Acharya Shri Chander College of Medical Sciences and Hospital, Jammu, to grant admission to the petitioner under NRI quota pursuant to Admission Notice dated 11th February, 2014 (supra). It shall be open to the respondent No. 2 to make readjustment of the streams (General Surgery or Anaesthesia) among the petitioner and respondent No. 4 (Misbah Tabassum).
Justice Janak Raj Kotwal further observed that since the admission of the petitioner has been delayed due to act on the part of the respondent College, and the College is further directed to make arrangement for making up the deficiency accrued to the petitioner due to his late admission. State High Court also quashed the Clause 4.2 of the brochure.
While allowing the petition, Justice Janak Raj Kotwal observed that petitioner has been deprived admission arbitrarily and without any fault on his part. Out of the four candidates, who qualified the common entrance test for admission to two seats under NRI quota, petitioner alone was the son of an NRI and therefore, the most bona fide claimant.
While as the College should have preferred him over the remaining three, unfortunately he alone came to be deprived of the admission. Not only that, petitioner lost no time in pointing out to the College by serving notice through his counsel that the other three candidates were not eligible under NRI quota and was quick in filing the first writ petition immediately after the College granted admission to respondents, Shagun Mahajan and Jeevitesh Khoda in the first instance. Inspite of all that the College seems not to have accorded consideration to his grievance and instead proceeded ahead in granting admission to respondent No. 4 (Misbah Tabassam).
Going by ordinary prudence, the College should not have ignored the petitioner. Depriving him relief in these petitions for any reason, whatsoever, would mean nothing less than endorsing and compounding the illegality committed by the College and tilting the scale of justice towards injustice, which cannot be done. The petitioner’s case, therefore, falls in that rare category where the cut-off date, cannot be permitted to operate as a bar to admission to him as that would result in depriving him of the one time opportunity that may ruin his professional career and allowed the petition with above said observation. JNF
