delhihighcourt

HARGUN SINGH AHLUWALIA & ORS. vs DELHI UNIVERSITY & ORS.

$~83
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 23.08.2024
+ W.P.(C) 11695/2024
HARGUN SINGH AHLUWALIA & ORS. …..Petitioners
Through: Mr. Rishi Malhotra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ravinder Singh & Ms Raveesha Gupta, Advocates.
versus

DELHI UNIVERSITY & ORS. …..Respondents
Through: Mr. Mohinder JS Rupal and Mr.Hardik Rupal, Advs. for DU.
Mr. Sanjay Khanna, Standing Counsel, Ms. Pragya Bhushan, Mr. Karandeep Singh, Mr. Tarandeep Singh, Advocates for NTA.
Mr. Romy Chacko Senior Advocate with Mr. Varun Mudgal, Advocate for St. Stephens College.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
JUDGMENT
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J. (ORAL)

CM APPL. 48625/2024 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 11695/2024
3. The present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners praying for the following reliefs:
“That in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to-
(a) writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ for directing the respondent no.3 to provide one seat each to the petitioner for the courses in which they have qualified and accepted by the respondent college;
(b) direct the respondent no 1 to accommodate the petitioners in their next choice of college as per the list of colleges selected by the petitioners in the interim period in view of academic session commencing from 29.08.2024 to protect their career;
(c) Writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to pay the costs of this petition to the Petitioners;
(d) A writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents to pay just and appropriate compensation for the mental trauma inflicted upon the Petitioners”

4. Issue Notice. Mr. Mohinder JS Rupal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 1 i.e., University of Delhi; Mr. Sanjay Khanna, learned Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 2 i.e. National Testing Agency; and Mr. Varun Mudgal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 3 College i.e. St. Stephens College.
5. Counter-affidavit(s) be filed within one week from today, after providing advance copies of the same to learned counsel for the petitioners, who may file rejoinder thereto, if any, within one week thereafter.
6. List for further proceedings on 11.09.2024.
CM APPL. 48626/2024 (interim relief)
7. The present application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’) has been filed on behalf of the applicants/ petitioners, praying as follows:
“a. Appropriate order/directions directing Respondents and in particular Respondent no. 3 to reserve a seat each to the petitioner for the courses in which they have qualified and accepted by the respondent college during the pendency of the instant writ;
b. direct the respondent no 1 to accommodate the petitioners in their next choice of college as per the list of colleges selected by the petitioners in the interim period in view of academic session commencing from 29.08.2024 to protect their career.”

8. Issue Notice. Mr. Mohinder JS Rupal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 1 i.e., University of Delhi; Mr. Sanjay Khanna, learned Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 2 i.e. National Testing Agency; and Mr. Varun Mudgal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent no. 3 College i.e. St. Stephens College.
9. Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioners had successfully qualified the requirements for obtaining the requisite marks for the purposes of securing admission to a college of their desired choice in the University of Delhi. It is stated that respondent no. 3 College is a Christian College, which is affiliated with respondent no. 1 University. It is stated that the Common University Entrance Test (‘CUET’) applications were floated by the respondent no. 2 i.e. NTA from 27.02.2024 to 05.04.2024, for which the petitioners had duly applied. The CUET tests were conducted from 15.05.2024 to 24.05.2024. It is stated that on account of certain issues, a test was rescheduled for 29.05.2024. It is stated that in furtherance of the above, the Common Seat Allocation System (CSAS) Phase I, wherein the uploading and registration of documents was to be done, was held between 01.06.2024 to 07.08.2024. It is stated that on 28.07.2024, the CUET results were declared by the respondent no. 2 NTA, wherein the petitioners had obtained the following marks:
Names
Marks Scored
Hargun Singh Ahulwalia
776/800
Aleena Imran
754/800
Gursanjan Singh Natt
770/800
Alok Ranjan Singh
770/800
Nishika Sahoo
740/800
Prisha Tayal
742/800

10. It is stated that a press release for Allocation-cum-Admission schedule for Undergraduate admissions for the Academic Session 2024-25 was issued by the respondent no. 1. It is stated that from 01.08.2024 to 07.08.2024, i.e. during the CSAS Phase II, the students were required to give their preference/choice of college. The same was also duly complied with by the petitioners, and the courses and the college preference were duly filled by the petitioners. The details of the same are as under:

Names
Course/College
Hargun Singh Ahulwalia

B.A Program (History + Philosophy)
St Stephen’s College
Aleena Imran
B.A (Hons) Economics
St Stephen’s College
Gursanjan Singh Natt
B.A Program (Economics + Philosophy)
St Stephen’s College
Alok Ranjan Singh
B.A Program (English + History)
St Stephen’s College
Nishika Sahoo
B.A Program (English + Economics)
St Stephen’s College
Prisha Tayal
B.A Program (Economics + Philosophy)
St Stephen’s College

11. It is further stated that on 16.08.2024, the first list of CSAS allocation was declared and the petitioners had duly qualified in the same. It is stated that as per the schedule, the candidates were required to “accept” the allocated seats from 16.08.2024 to 18.08.2024, which was also done by the petitioners. Thereafter, as per the schedule, the respondent no. 3 College was to verify and approve the online applications from 16.08.2024 to 20.08.2024 and thereafter, the online fees was to be paid by 21.08.2024.
12. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondent no. 3 neither approved nor rejected the online applications of the petitioners herein despite the same being duly uploaded; all the necessary compliances and approvals being done by the petitioners, as a result of which, the petitioners were unable to pay the online fee and thus, could not secure a seat in their desired college i.e. respondent no 3. It is now the prayer of the present petitioners that since the petitioners were unable to pay the online fees and could not secure a seat in the desired college, i.e. respondent no. 3, the respondent no. 3 be directed to, in the interim, either grant provisional admission to the petitioners or secure a seat till the disposal of the present writ petition.
13. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to an e-mail dated 17.08.2024, enclosed with Annexure F. It is stated that vide this email, the petitioners herein were informed that as per the allocation policy of the University of Delhi’s Common Seat Allocation System 2024, the petitioners had been provisionally allocated to B.A.(Hons.) Economics in St. Stephens College in CSAS (UG) Round 1. They were further asked to accept allocation under the User Action Tab, by 18.08.2024, and thereafter wait for approval from the College Principal, if any. On receiving the Approval from College Principal, they had to proceed to pay the fee to confirm admission. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite being granted provisionally allocation, the respondent no. 3 College neither approved nor gave admission to the petitioners, despite the petitioners being duly approved.
14. Learned counsel for the petitioners also states that the petitioners herein have not been able to pay the fees in such peculiar circumstances and therefore, it is prayed that respondent no. 3 be directed to provide one seat each to the petitioners for courses in which they have qualified, or in the alternative, direct the respondent no. 1 to accommodate the petitioners in the next choice of college, as per the list of colleges, selected by the petitioners in the interim period, in view of the commencing academic session, to protect their career.
15. Since this Court was not inclined to pass an order in the absence of learned counsel for respondent no. 3 College, Sh. Romi Chacko, learned Senior Counsel graciously appeared before this Court, upon being informed by learned counsel for respondent no. 1, at 03:00 PM, and stated that he was neither in receipt of the present petition nor of advance notice of this petition. However, he assisted the Court to the extent that on instructions, he could inform this Court that the respondent no. 1 had allocated 19 candidates in B.A. Program, instead of 3 candidates who could have been accommodated as per the settled policy.
16. Sh. Chacko further states that in this regard, the College has already lodged its protest by writing a letter, to respondent no. 1 University. Learned counsel for respondent no. 1, on the other hand, states that he will file a detailed reply in this regard and states that respondent no. 3 is raising frivolous objections, and it is duty bound to comply with the allocation list issued by the University.
17. In this Court’s opinion, the petitioners herein were allocated the respondent no. 3 College as college of their preference and choice, as per policy of respondent no. 1 University, after clearing the CUET exam and further clearing all the formalities. They had duly received communication in this regard. While the counselling has commenced and will conclude by 25.08.2024, the online applications of the petitioners has neither been rejected nor accepted by respondent no. 3 till date and their applications are still being reflected as ‘under process’ on the admission portal of respondent no. 1 University.
18. In these peculiar circumstances, without there being any fault on the part of the present petitioners and despite them being meritorious and having cleared all the formalities and tests, are being kept under suspense regarding the fate of their admission. Such circumstances, where their future prospects of studying in the college of their choice are being compromised due to the policy related disputes of respondent no. 1 and respondent no. 3, it will require judicial intervention, in the interest of the petitioners.
19. In view thereof, this Court directs that the petitioners herein will be granted provisional admission in respondent no. 3 College, as per allocation by respondent no. 1 University.
20. Further, also keeping in mind the fact that in case the petitioners do not succeed in this petition, they may lose the prospects of securing admission in the second preference for a college, in case they are not able to deposit the fee as required under the relevant rules, this Court orders that the respondent no. 1 i.e. University of Delhi will open its portal for depositing fee, only for the petitioners herein, tomorrow morning between 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
21. This is an interim arrangement to ensure that the petitioners do not lose their chance of securing admission in another college of their choice, in case they do not succeed in the present petition.
22. It is also clarified that this order was passed in the presence of the learned counsels for all the parties for their information.
23. In above terms, the interim application is disposed of.
24. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
AUGUST 23, 2024/at

W.P. (C) 11695/2024 Page 7 of 9