Miss. Paramjit Kaur Dahela and others vs State of Punjab and others

This petition (amended) has been filed to quash Annexure P-3 as well as the admission of respondents No. 6 to 13 and for issue of mandamus to fill the seats on the basis of entrance test conducted by Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar for the year 1992-93 and to allot seats in M.B.B.S. Course to the petitioners. A prayer has also been made to direct the official respondents to declare the list of candidates admitted in various categories meritwise.

On the basis of the instructions issued by the Government of Punjab, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, conducted entrance test for the M.B.B.S., B.D.S. and B.A.M.S. (Ayurvedic Acharya) Courses in Government Medical/ Dental Colleges, Patiala/Amritsar/Faridkot and Government Ayurvedic College, Patiala for the year 1992-93. The distribution of seats was detailed in para 4.1 of prospectus and eligibility for admission to the various courses was mentioned in Para 4.2. After conducting the test the Universtiy declared the result. Names of the petitioners appeared between Sr. No. 251 to 293 in the merit list.

The petitioners have alleged that although they had a right to be admitted against the seats meant for M.B.B.S. Course, the official respondents unlawfully deprived this opportunity to the petitioners and arbitrarily admitted respondents No. 6 to 31. Petitioners have also alleged that the respondents did not disclose the list of persons admitted along with their specialty and merit number and this was done with the sole object of making nomination of few favoured candidates. Petitioners have pleaded that respondent No. 31, who stands at merit No. 1876, has been admitted on the basis of order passed by the High Court in C.W.P. No. 2102/93, even though the petitioners were not parties to that writ petition and it was not brought to the notice of the Court that more meritorious persons were still awaiting in the queue.

Respondents have filed separate replies and defended their admissions on various grounds but in my opinion, it is not necessary to give details of the various points raised by the non-petitioners because, in my opinion, the so called illegality committed by the official respondents in admitting less meritorious candidates has been reduced to mere academics because of the long passage of time between the institution of the writ petition and its hearing and decision.

Learned Advocate General Punjab pointed out that all the candidates admitted to M.B.B.S. Course have completed almost three years of their Course as on date and even the petitioners, who have been admitted to B.D.S. Course are on the verge of completion of their Course. On the basis of these facts, the learned Advocate General argued that it would be a serious injury to public interest if the admission made in the year 1992-93 are disturbed by Court order at this belated stage. Learned counsel for the petitioners very fairly admitted that most of his clients got admission in B.D.S. Course and they are likely to complete their course in near future. He, however, laid emphasis on the adjudication of illegalities committed by the authorities and argued that mere delay in the decision of the case should not give immunity to the public authorities to bye-pass the claim of more meritorious persons.

It is difficult to pinpoint the single reason which is responsible for delay in the decision of cases involving claim of the students for admission to different courses but the fact remains that delay in decision of such cases renders the matter in fructuous in a large number and keeping in mind the well settled proposition of law that equitable jurisdiction of this Court should not be exercised to issue any direction which would cause injustice to the parties. In a case like the present one where admission of 26 candidates to the M.B.B.S. Course has been challenged, the issue of a direction resulting in nullification of the admissions of respondents No. 6 to 31 would benefit none. This Court cannot issue a mandamus for giving admissions to the petitioners with retrospective effect. Quashing of the admissions of the private respondents would leave the seats open and the studies undertaken by the private respondents will be sheer waste. Public will be deprived of the services of 26 future doctors. The money spent on their studies will also be sheer waste. In view of this development and the observations made by the Supreme Court in Dr. Subodh Nautiyal Vs. State of U.P. and others, , Rai Chand Jain Vs. Miss Chandra Kanta Khosla, and State of Uttar Pradesh and others Vs. Dr. Anupam Gupta, etc., I am not inclined to interfere with the admissions of the private respondents, nor I am inclined to issue mandamus to the respondents to admit the petitioners to the M.B.B.S. Course at this belated stage because it is not within the purview of this court to order creation of additional seats and that too after a lapse of more than three years.

For the aforementioned reasons the writ petition is dismissed. Liberty is, however, given to the petitioners to apply for compensation for the wrong done to them by the official respondents. It is also made clear that if any of the petitioner has got admission to. M.B.B.S. Course during the pendency of this writ petition, her right shall not be adversely affected only because of the dismissal of this petition.

Petition dismissed.