G H ANITTA JOB & ORS. versus THE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

Citation: [2018] 5 S.C.R. 326 · Decided: 20-04-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
326
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 5 S.C.R.
ANITTA JOB & ORS.
v.
THE STATE OF KERALA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 3874 of 2018)
APRIL 20, 2018
[A. K. SIKRI AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.]
Education/Educational Institutions: Admission – MBBS
course – As per High Court’s order, application for admission to be
made online – Appellants-candidates’s case was that although they
obtained the demand drafts pertaining to fee for admission prior to
the last date for application, but their online application could not
be submitted due to some snag in the website of the Malabar Medical
College – Name of appellants did not appear in the list of eligible
candidates – Complaints by Appellants-candidates – Admission
Supervisory Committee (ASC) took cognizance of complaints on
22.9.2016 and noted the stand of the college that their names shall
be included in the list of eligible candidates – Notice issued by
college accepting the same with condition that candidates shall
submit proof of unsuccessful attempts for registration and with
demand draft taken before the scheduled cut off date – The college
had earlier made attempts for admission in the management/NRI
quota but seats could  not be filled up –Admissions of all appellants
in the college – Eight seats belonging to Management/NRI quota
were surrendered to the Government –  On 4.3.2017, ASC withheld
the admissions of seventy eight candidates under Management quota
and eight candidates under NRI quota made by college – ASC
rejected the case of four of the candidates who were admitted in the
college in Management quota on the ground that their names were
outside the list published by the Medical college and with regard to
six appellants who were admitted under NRI quota, their admission
were disapproved as they were not included in any of the online
application lists submitted by the Medical college – Writ petition –
Interim order passed permitting appellants to appear in first year
MBBS examination – Writ petition dismissed – On appeal, this court
ordered interim order to operate and finally held: The present case
is not a case where the appellants did not appear in the NEET
[2018] 5 S.C.R. 326
                                                   326
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
327
examination or they were granted admission disregarding the merits
of other candidates in NEET – No details of any candidate who
secured higher rank or merit to the appellants and was not given
admission in the College was brought on record – It may be true
that the order of the ASC dated 22.09.2016 did not expressly permit
the College to invite all the candidates who had earlier made their
unsuccessful attempts for on-line registration to come up for being
included in the list of eligible candidates of the College but the
College having given such opportunity to others in addition to seven
candidates who had complained to the ASC, such action of the
College cannot be termed the mala fide or with oblique motive
especially when similarly situated candidates were included in the
list of eligible candidates – High Court had not given due
consideration to the important condition which was put by the
College in the notice dated 23.09.2016 that candidates who come,
claiming that they made unsuccessful attempts for on-line registration
and come up with proof to show that they had prepared demand
draft of fee which was of prior date to the last date of admission –
This  safeguard was enough to ward of applicants who never thought
of admission in the College prior to last date of admission – It is not
disputed that the appellants had proof of demand drafts in the name
of College which were prior to the last date of admission – In the
facts of the case where admission was also notified by the University
and the ASC for the first time disapproved their admissions only on
3.6.2016 and further the appellants were also permitted to appear
in the examination of MBBS First Year by the High Court, at this
distance of time, the appellants cannot be thrown out of the College
on account of the  shortcomings as pointed by the ASC and the
High Court – The order of the High Court and the ASC is set aside.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The order dated 22.09.2016 has to be treated as
passed by the ASC in exercise of its statutory power. It is true
that in the order dated 22.09.2016, there was no clear direction
that names of other candidates who have not even submitted
complaints should be included or any fresh applications be in

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.