Aditi v. Delhi Pharmaceutical Sciences & Research University & ANR.
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10581/2016 ADITI ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr. R.K. Bachchan, Adv.
versus DELHI PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES & RESEARCH UNIVERSITY & ANR.
..... Respondents Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
O R D E R
% 02.12.2016 1.
On the last date of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to place on record the Rules & Regulations governing the admission/academic session relating to the B.PT course. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner states, no such Rules & Regulations are in existence.
2.
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner being eligible for the B.PT course, had on August 24, 2016 at about 10 am visited the respondents for taking admission. She had submitted the application form at the admission counter and was directed to wait up till 2 pm. The petitioner accordingly waited till 2 pm, when she was informed that the admission has been closed.
3.
It is stated in the petiton that the Registrar had advised the petitioner to visit the institution on September 7, 2016. When she visited again on September 7, 2016, she was directed to come on September 16, 2016, on wihch date she was informed that the admission has been closed. It is her case that one Professor Mrs. Harvinder Popli, Professor of Pharmaceutics & Dean, Student Affairs, has in her noting stated that 2-3 seats are vacant. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that the course in question is a semester course and the examination shall be held in this month i.e. December, 2016. He would plead that when the vacancies are in existence, the petitioner can be accommodated against the said vacancies. I note, that the petitioner has made an attempt to secure admission in the month of August and September, 2016. Even the note of Professor Harvinder Popli was of September 16, 2016. The petitioner had sent a legal notice on September 26, 2016.
5.
It is the case of the petitioner that she was not given admission on the ground that the admissions have been closed. Noting the fact that exams are scheduled in the month of December, 2016 and the admissions have been closed, it is quite late in the day for the petitioner to seek admission in the course concerned.
6.
This Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The same is dismissed.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J DECEMBER 02, 2016/ak