Ayushi Agrahari v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 244 of 2021 • Ayushi Agrahari D/o Shri Shivanand Agrahari Aged About 21 Years R/o Katiyapara Juna Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Of Ayurved, Yog Aur Prakritik Unani Sidd Avem Homyopaith (Aayush) Chhattisgarh Raipur.

3. National Medical Commission Through Its Secretary General, Pocket -14, Sector - 8, Dwarka, Phase - I, New Delhi, Pin Code - 110 007

4. Director Of Medical Education State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Director, Medical Education, Old Nurses Hostel, DKS Bhawan Campus, Raipur, District Raipur, Chahttisgarh.

5. Aditi Mishra Roll No. 1702009130, Through Selection Committee Directorate Of Ayurved, Yog Aur Prakritik Unani Sidd Avem Homyopaithi (Ayush) Chhattisgarh Raipur.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Harshmandar Rastogi, Advocate For State :

Smt. Fouzia Mirza, Addl. A.G.

For Respondent No.3 :

Shri R.S.Marhas, Advocate D.B.:- Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 15/01/2021 This petition has been filed aggrieved by rejection for her candidature for admission in BAMS course under EWS category.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filled up

online registration form and also deposited all required documents including certificate of economically weaker section issued by the competent authority as per the rules. However, on 30/12/2020, when the petitioner appeared before the authorities, her candidature was orally rejected without assigning any reason. It is submitted that respondent No.5, as learned by the petitioner, has been offered admission, which is illegal because respondent No.5 has secured lesser marks as per the merit list.

3.

Learned State counsel submits that the petition has been filed long after the stated rejection of the claim, that too on the last date of admission. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no document has been filed along with the petition to show that respondent No.5 has been granted admission. 4.

We find that the petitioner, somehow has the grievance that the petitioner's claim of admission to BAMS course was rejected on 30/12/2020. The petitioner, however, approached this Court today when the admissions have been drawn to close as per the schedule fixed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In view of the directions of the Supreme Court issued from time to time, no admission can be ordered after the last date of hearing. Therefore, at this stage, no relief can be granted to the petitioner because the petition itself has been filed on the last date and there is no material on record to pass any order on extra ordinary reasons granting provisional admission to the petitioner under EWS category. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Sd/- Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) (Rajani Dubey) Judge Judge Deepti