Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of L. Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai* and Krishna Murari, JJ has refused to grant any relief to the students who were admitted to the 1st year Professional MBBS course for the Academic Session 2016-2017 in Glocal Medical College, in contravention of the Notification that provided that the admissions were to be done only through the centralized admission process and not by way of private counselling.
The review petitioners had argued before the Court that they were duly qualified to be admitted inasmuch as, they had cleared the NEET examination. The review petitioners were admitted through the counselling conducted by the Glocal Medical College and had also cleared the 1st year and 2nd year examination.
However, the MCI as well as the State of Uttar Pradesh, submitted on the other hand that the Glocal Medical College, being very well aware about the Notification dated 22.8.2016, had conducted private counselling, which was not permissible in law and as such, the review petitioners, who entered through backdoor entry, are not entitled to any equitable relief.
Rejecting the review petitioners’ contention that the Notification dated 22.8.2016 is only an administrative instruction and therefore not binding, the Court held that the private counselling by Glocal Medical College was conducted contrary to the Notification issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh, which, in turn, was based on the judgment in Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2016 SCC OnLine SC 373, decided on 2.5.2016.
3-member oversight committee constituted to oversee the functioning of MCI
Further, the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court vide judgment dated 15.9.2016 had negated the challenge to the Notification dated 22.8.2016.
Hence, in the light of this position, it was not at all permissible for the Glocal Medical College to have conducted private counselling.
“The admissions which were conducted through the said private counselling cannot be termed as anything else but per se illegal.”
Further, MCI vide order dated 27.1.2017 had discharged the said students, who were not admitted through centralized admission process. 25 students admitted in the same college, who were admitted through the centralized admission process, were very much absorbed by the DGME in other colleges. Hence, the contention of the review petitioners that they came to know about the discharge order 21 dated 27.1.2017 issued by MCI only when they had filed a petition in the High Court in 2019 does not stand to reason.
In such scenario, the Court found it difficult to appreciate as to how the results of the students were declared for the 1st year MBBS examination, how they were admitted in the 2nd year MBBS course and how they cleared the 2nd year MBBS examination, despite the fact that MCI had discharged the students vide order dated 27.1.2017.
Refusing to show any sympathies to students who had entered through backdoor, the Court held,
“The Notification issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh on the basis of the law laid down by this Court clearly provided that the admissions were to be done only through the centralized admission process. Glocal Medical College in contravention of the said Notification conducted private counselling, which was not at all permissible in law. The students cannot be said to be ignorant about the Notification issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh.”
[Abdul Ahad v. Union of India, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 627, decided on 17.08.2021]
*Judgment by: Justice BR Gavai
For Review Petitioners: Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul
For MCI: Advocate Dhawal Mohan
For State of Uttar Pradesh: Advocate Ankit Goel
