LexDOLLY CHHANDA versus CHAIRMAN, JEE AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
DOLLY CHHANDA v. CHAIRMAN, JEE AND ORS. OCTOBER 5, 2004 [R.C. LAHOTI, CJ. G.P. MA THUR AND PRAKASH PRABHAKAR NAOLEKAR, JJ.] Education: A B Higher Education Admission to Medical College-Jn reserved category- C Denial of admission on account of ineligibility due to mistake in certificate- Candidature not considered despite rectification of mistake-Writ petition-- Dismissal of-On appeal, held: Denial of admission unjust and illegal- Candidate could not be denied her due on production of correct certijicate- Every infraction of the rule-relating to submission of proof need not necessarily D result in rejection of candidature-Direction to give admission to candidate. Appellant appeared in Joint Entrance Examination in 2003 under reserved MI category being daughter of ex-serviceman who was discharged from armed forces on the ground of permanent disability. She was called for counseling. In scrutiny it was revealed that the certificate E given to her father by Zilla Sainik Board did not satisfy the requirement of the reserved MI category, and her candidature was rejected. She produced permanent disability Certificate issued by Army Authorities and also produced fresh certificate issued by Zilla Sainik Board after rectifying the mistake at the time of another round of counseling, but her candidature was not considered. Appellant filed writ petition on the ground that it was F the mistake of the Sainik Board in not issuing correct certificate, and the same having been rectified in second certificate, she was entitled for admission. High Court 'dismissed the writ petition on the ground that she was not entitled for admission as her claim that she belonged to reserved MI category was not established at the time of first counseling. Allowing the appeal, the CQurt HELD 1. The appellant undoubtedly belonged to reserved MI category. Her father may not have noticed the mistake which was committed by the Zilla Sainik Board while issuing the first certificate. But G 79 H 80 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. A it does not mean that the appellant should be denied her due when she produced a correct certificate at the stage of second counseling. The view taken by the Authorities in denying admission to the appellant is wholly unjust and illegal. The respondents are directed to give admission to the appellant in any one of the State medical Colleges forthwith in the current B academic year. In case the State seats have already been filled up one extra seat shall be created for her. [84-G-H; 85-A; 85-C] 2. In order to avail of the benefit of reservation or weightage etc. necessary certificates have to be produced. These are documents in the nature of proof of holding of particular qualification or percentage of C marks secured or entitlement for benefit of reservation. Depending upon the facts of a case, there can be some relaxation in the matter of submission of proof and it will not be proper to apply any rigid principle as it pertains in the domain of procedure. Every infraction of the rule relating to submission of proof need not necessarily result in rejection of candidature. D [83-A-B) Charles K. Skaria and Ors v. Dr. C. Mathew and Ors., [1980) 2 SCC 752, relied on. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 6506 of2004. E From the Judgment and Order dated 31.10.2003 of the Orissa High Court in W.P.No. 11248 of 2003. Amarendra Bal and Rakesh Uttamchadra Upadhyay for the Appellant. Janaranjana Das, Swetaketu Mishra and Ms. Moushumi Gahlot for the F Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by G.P. MATHUR. 1. Leave granted. G 2. This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 31.10.2003 of High Court of Orissa by which the writ petition filed by the appellant for issuing a direction to the respondents to admit her in MBBS course was summarily dismissed. 3. The appellant passed 10+2 (Science) Examination conducted by the H Council of Higher Secondary Education, Orissa, in First Class. As she was .... • DOLLY CHHANDA v. CHAJRMAN [G.P. MATHUR, J.] 81 desirous of joining a medical course, she appeared in the Joint Entrance A Examination, 2003 (for short 'JEE-2003 ') under the reserved MI category being daughter of an ex-serviceman NK Manoranjan Chhanda who was discharged from armed forces on the ground of permanent disability. Under Clause 2. l .4 of Information Brochure of JEE-2003 certain percent
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.