VANSH S/O PRAKASH DOLAS versus THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION & THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 3 S.C.R. 705 · Decided: 20-03-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

* Author
[2024] 3 S.C.R. 705: 2024 INSC 235
Vansh S/o Prakash Dolas 
v. 
The Ministry of Education & The Ministry of Health & 
Family Welfare & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No(s). 4427-4428 of 2024)
20 March 2024
[B.R. Gavai, Rajesh Bindal and Sandeep Mehta,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Matter pertains to MBBS admission to a Maharashtra State domicile 
in Maharashtra despite his father’s deployment outside Maharashtra 
as a paramilitary personnel.
Headnotes
Education/Educational Institutions – Medical admission – 
Cancellation – Appellant-domicile of Maharashtra and son 
of Constable in BSF, passed his SSC and HSC exams from 
an institution outside the State of Maharashtra – Applied for 
admission to an MBBS course under the Other Backward 
Class/Non-Creamy Layer category – Despite being issued a 
provisional selection letter, his admission was cancelled – Writ 
petition challenging the cancellation on the ground that he 
was entitled to the exception under clause 4.8 of the NEET 
UG-2023 Information Brochure pertaining to the ‘Children of 
employees of Government of India or its Undertaking’ – High 
Court dismissed the petition holding that the appellant did 
not satisfy the requirements of clauses 4.8 and 9.4.4 of the 
Brochure since he did not select specified reservation, in the 
category of Children of Defence personnel while submitting 
the online application form – Correctness:
Held: As per clause 4.8.1 of Information Brochure, the children 
of employees of the Government of India or its Undertaking have 
been made eligible for admission even though they might have 
passed SSC and/or HSC or equivalent exam from a recognised 
institution situated outside the State of Maharashtra – However, 
while making such relaxation, a condition has been imposed that 
the employee of Government of India or its Undertaking being the 
parent of the candidate should have been transferred back to the 
State of Maharashtra and also have reported for duty and must 
706
[2024] 3 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
be working as on the last date of the document verification at a 
place located in Maharashtra – This condition creates a stipulation 
which would be impossible for the candidate or his parent to 
fulfill – Place of posting is not within the control of the employee 
or the candidate – Candidate born in Maharashtra and whose 
parents are also domicile of the State of Maharashtra and are 
employees of the Government of India or its Undertaking, such 
candidate would be entitled to a seat under the Maharashtra State 
quota irrespective of the place of posting of the parent because 
the place of deployment would not be under the control of the 
candidate or his parents – Impugned judgment is unsustainable 
in facts as well as in law – Furthermore, letter/communication 
cancelling the admission without giving opportunity to show cause 
also illegal and arbitrary – More than six months have passed 
by since the session started and no seat is lying vacant in any 
college in Maharashtra State quota as on date – Appellant has 
been illegally deprived from his rightful admission in the first year 
of the MBBS course owing to the insensitive, unjust, illegal and 
arbitrary approach of the respondents and so also on account 
of the delay occasioned in the judicial process – As regards the 
restitutive relief, it would neither be desirable nor justifiable to 
grant admission to the appellant in the on-going session of the 
MBBS(UG) course – However, the appellant entitled to restoration 
of his seat in the first year of MBBS(UG) course in the same 
college in the next session-NEET UG-2024 – Impugned orders set 
aside – Respondents-college and the State to pay compensation 
to the tune of Rs. 1 lakh (Rs. 50,000/-) each to the appellant for 
the deprivation of one year and harassment on the account of 
illegal and arbitrary cancellation of admission. [Paras 21-23, 26, 
28, 31, 32]
Case Law Cited
Archana Sudhakar Mandulkar v. Dean, Govt. Medical 
College, Nagpur and others (1986) SCC OnLine Bom 
262; Rajiv Purshottam Wadhwa v. State of Maharashtra 
(through it’s Dept of Medical Education and Drugs & 
Others) (2000) SCC Online Bom 359; Manoj Kumar v. 
Union of India and Others [2024] 2 SCR 409 : (2024) 
SCC OnLine SC 163; S. Krishna Sradha v. State of 
Andhra Pradesh and Others [2017] 2 SCR 466 : (2017) 
4 SCC 516 – referred to.
[2024] 3 S.C.R. 
707
Vansh S/o Prakash Dolas v. The Ministry of Education &  
The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare

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