Fundamental Rights Of Meritorious Students Must Not Be Frustrated Due To Technical Formalities: Rajasthan HC In NEET Exam Case

The Rajasthan High Court remarked that the merit scored by the students should be the exclusive criteria for allotment of seats or colleges and the fundamental rights of meritorious students should not be frustrated due to technical formalities.

The Jaipur Bench remarked thus in a batch of Writ Petitions preferred by the students against the authorities in NEET Exam case.

A Single Bench of Justice Sameer Jain observed, “… the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents are on a distinguishable factual narrative and hence, ought not to be made applicable herein; that taking note of the ratio enunciated in Asha (Supra) and Premsukh (Supra), this Court is of the view that the merit scored by the petitioners should be the exclusive criteria for allotment of seats/colleges, and in no manner due to the technical formalities the fundamental rights of the meritorious petitioners ought not to be frustrated and the instant petitions fall under the ambit of the rarest of the rare cases, where judicial intervention is warranted.”

The Bench emphasised that the consideration of candidate solely on the basis of merit, un-biasness, and transparency in the selection process, are the ethos of the selection/admission process.

Advocate Vivek Joshi represented the Petitioners while AAG Vigyan Shah represented the Respondents.

Facts of the Case -

The National Testing Agency (NTA) had issued a Public Notice inviting applications from PAN India candidates for NEET-UG Examination, 2024. The Petitioners (students/candidates) with high aspirations and upon attaining or possessing requisite eligibility appeared in the said exam. Successfully after conducting the general counselling, vide notification, the Respondents (authorities) issued an information for a Stray Vacancy Round allotment process for MBBS and BDS Courses. In view of this, the counsel for the Petitioners averred that the Petitioners were higher in merit that the Respondent-students. It was further contended that at the time of document verification in the Stray Vacancy Round, the Petitioners appeared before the officials/subordinate employees of the Respondents and furnished necessary documents.

Nonetheless, a subordinate employee of the Respondents during the said document verification session had asked the Petitioners, to furnish an affidavit, as the subject ‘Biology’ was not mentioned in the XI Class mark-sheets submitted by them. Howsoever, the Petitioners had duly informed the said authority that they were promoted from Class XI to Class XII amidst COVID-19 pandemic situation and moreover, the same was made applicable to all the students enrolled for that academic year as directed by the Central and State Government. Subsequently, Provisional Combined Allotment list for College allotment was released by the Respondents, however, the candidature of the Petitioner No.1 was ousted from that list albeit her name was reflected in the first list and she had furnished requisite documents. She presented her grievance but no action was taken thereafter. Hence, the case was before the High Court.

The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, noted, “A good college, as per the merit scored is the fruit that the candidates obtain resultant to their dedication and aspirations in life and in no situation the same can be compromised and the rule of merit should supersede over any other technical instruments.”

The Court directed the Respondents to consider the candidature of the Petitioners, strictly on the basis of the merit scored by them in NEET UG Examination, 2024 and allot Medical Colleges considering the same.

“Candidature/allotment of Colleges qua respondent nos. 5 and 6 is rejected considering the merit scored by them vis-à-vis the petitioners. Respondents are directed to carry out the requisites without further ado, as it is noted that the classes/lectures qua the relevant academic year have already begin”, it further ordered.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petitions.

Cause Title- Kanchan Kumawat v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:RJ-JP:46833)

Appearance:

Petitioners: Advocates Vivek Joshi, Tanveer Ahamad, Vikash Ghosalya, Prithvi Pal, and Jeetendra Kumar Sharma.

Respondents: AAG Vigyan Shah, CGC Devesh Yadav, Advocates Yash Joshi, M.S. Rghav, Vishvas Saini, Sanjay Khadar, Angad Mirdha, Abhinav Srivastava, and Raghunandan Sharma.

Click here to read/download the Judgment