Rajasthan HC relief to BUMS aspirant denied admission despite provisional seat allotment
Rajasthan High Court
Jaipur: In a recent ruling, the Rajasthan High Court provided relief to a 28-year-old NEET qualified candidate whose admission to the Bachelor of Unani Medicine and Surgery (BUMS) course at Rajasthan Unani Medical College, Jaipur, was unjustly cancelled by the counselling board despite having paid the necessary fees and being allotted a provisional seat.
The cancellation was done because the petitioner failed to submit the original marksheet for his Biology subject on time, which he had cleared through the Rajasthan State Open School.
While considering his plea, the Single Bench of Justice Sameer Jain said that the cancellation of the petitioner’s admission was not legally sustainable and therefore it directed the state to accept the marksheet within 15 days of the order and take all necessary steps to ensure the petitioner can complete the course, including arranging extra classes to compensate for any missed lectures.
The judgment was passed by the court after it observed that the interpretation of Clauses 23 and 31 of the National Council for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) guidelines must follow the principles of “Ejusdem Generis” and “Noscitur a Sociis.” These principles imply that while final admission cannot be approved without original documents, provisional admission cannot be cancelled outright if the candidate's non-compliance was due to reasons beyond his control.
Further, the bench observed that where a procedural requirement is directory and the candidate has otherwise met the substantive thresholds, strict insistence on a technical formality, particularly one frustrated by the authorities themselves, undermines the very object of the admission scheme.
Background of the case
The petitioner, a resident of Alwar, had participated in the NEET UG Ayush counselling for the academic year 2024-25. Although he initially lacked the Biology subject in his Class 12 qualifications, he completed it later through the Rajasthan State Open School. His result was declared on September 10, 2024, before the first counselling round began.
Following the NEET results, Anwar was allotted a seat at the Rajasthan Unani Medical College, Jaipur. He paid the required Rs. 25,000 fee and submitted all necessary documents except the original mark sheet, which had not been issued by the Open School due to administrative delays. For this, he submitted an affidavit during the counselling, promising to submit the original document within 15 days of receipt.
However, despite the provisional seat allotment, the petitioner fulfilled all the required conditions and even submitted an undertaking, the authorities suddenly cancelled his admission. This was done without giving him a chance to submit the original mark sheet once it was available.
He later approached the High Court, arguing that the delay was not his fault and that the cancellation was unfair and violated his rights under Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Constitution. At the same time, the counsel for the petitioner claimed that it also undermines the sanctity of the counselling process and the legitimate expectations of candidates who have adhered to the procedural mandates in good faith.
Respondents' Submissions
The counsel for the respondents argued that the petitioner was not eligible for admission to the BUMS course. They pointed out that his result was declared under the open category after the first round of counselling had ended.
They also mentioned that the issue of eligibility for such candidates is still under consideration in other court cases. Referring to Clauses 23 and 31 of the NCISM guidelines, they stated that submission of original mark sheets is mandatory for admission. Since the petitioner failed to submit the original mark sheet on time, his admission was rightly cancelled.
Lastly, they argued that the petition is now pointless because there are no seats left and the academic session has already begun. Therefore, they requested the court to dismiss the petition.
Court's observation
After hearing from both sides and considering the petitioner's arguments, the court highlighted that on December 11, 2024, it had already passed an interim order - in the presence of the government’s lawyer - directing that one seat be kept vacant for the petitioner. This order remained valid until the final decision and was never cancelled, even though the respondents were free to challenge it.
The court also noted that the deadline for applications had been extended by the authorities themselves till December 31, 2024. Additionally, the college website showed that seats were still available in January 2025.
Addressing the claim that admissions couldn’t be made mid-session, the court pointed out that in the 2021–22 session, admissions were allowed as late as May 2022 and later regularised. Since the respondents didn’t deny this, the court assumed it to be true.
The court referred to a 2023 Supreme Court ruling (Divya vs. Union of India), which stated that if a candidate has cleared all stages of admission, their candidature should only be cancelled after serious review — not over small issues.
While explaining the Doctrine of Substantial Compliance, the court said, "Courts while applying the Doctrine of Substantial Compliance have repeatedly held that where a procedural requirement is directory and the candidate has otherwise met the substantive thresholds, strict insistence on a technical formality, particularly one frustrated by the authorities themselves, undermines the very object of the admission scheme. The substantive requirement for a candidate's candidature was possession of documentary evidence of having passed the qualifying examination with the requisite subjects and percentage, with Biology being a principal subject. The Petitioner having fulfilled this condition was, therefore, eligible.”
Further, the court observed, "The furnishing of original mark sheets, as per Clauses 23 and 31 of the National Council for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM) directives, constitutes a provisional condition. This Court interprets these clauses, bearing in mind the principles of “Ejusdem generis” (of the same kind) and “Noscitur a sociis” (the meaning of a word can be gathered from its context), to mean that while final approval of an admission cannot be granted without the original documents, it does not mandate the outright cancellation of a provisionally granted admission when the failure to furnish such documents is attributable to circumstances beyond the control of the candidate."
In conclusion, the court ruled that cancelling the petitioner’s admission was legally wrong. It found the interpretation of the NCISM guidelines by the authorities to be too rigid and unfair in this case. The petitioner had submitted an undertaking and had approached the court before the final admission deadline while counselling was still ongoing.
"The Bench is of the view that the respondents' actions in cancelling the petitioner's admission were unsustainable in law, and the interpretation of Clauses 23 and 31 of the NCISM directives, as canvassed by the respondents, was unduly restrictive and did not mandate the harsh consequence of automatic cancellation of admission," said the Bench.
Final decision
In light of these observations, the court concluded that the cancellation of the petitioner’s admission was not legally sustainable. The state was directed to accept the marksheet if submitted within 15 days of the order. If the Open School still fails to issue the document, the admission will remain provisionally valid, subject to final verification.
The state was also directed to take all necessary steps to ensure the petitioner can complete the course, including arranging extra classes to compensate for any missed lectures.
"Adjust the fees already paid by the petitioner, in accordance with their directives, amounting to Rs. 25,000/-, towards the petitioner’s admission for the academic year pursuant to NEET UG-2024, and restore the petitioner to the provisionally allotted seat in Rajasthan Unani Medical College forthwith," said the court while disposing the petition.
To view the order, click on the link below:
