W.P.(C)/12617/2019 of NEHA SETHI Vs GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY AND ORS.
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 1 of 8
$~9 & 10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 30.03.2026
+ W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & CM APPL. 51096/2019
POOJA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vivek B Saharya, Adv.
versus
GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY AND
ORS. .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Jasbir Bidhuri for R-1/GGSIPU
10
+ W.P.(C) 12617/2019 & CM APPL. 51579/2019
NEHA SETHI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vivek B Saharya, Adv.
versus
GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY AND
ORS. .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Jasbir Bidhuri for R-1/GGSIPU
Mr. Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, CGSC with
Ms. Nandini Aggarwal, Ms.
Samiksha, Advs. for R-5/UOI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
: JASMEET SINGH, J ( ORAL)
1. These are writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Cons titution of
India seeking identical prayers, which are as follows:-
―(a) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ/order/direction/(s) directing the respondent to allot the
petitioner a seat in the Post Graduate Ayurveda Course
2019-20 session in Ch.Brahm Prakash Ayurveda Charak
Sansthan and grant admission; and
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 2 of 8
(b) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ/order/direction/(s) directing the respondents to cance l
the seat allotted to candidates in the mop-up being in
contravention of the notice dated 25.10.2019 and violative
of the provisions of Article 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the
Constitution and the Principles of Natural Justice…‖
2. The facts are that the petitioners are graduates in Ayurveda Course
and applied for State Counseling in April 2019 for Post Grad uate
Ayurveda Course. The respondent No. 1 is the university and
respondent No. 2 is the college affiliated with respondent No .1 and
respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 are private respondents, whose
admissions were sought to be cancelled by way of the present
petitions.
3. On 14.07.2019, All India Post Graduate Ayurveda Entrance Test 2019
was held and the petitioners duly participated.
4. The petitioner in W.P.(C) 12516/2019, secured 1018 rank in
Unreserved (“UR”) category and the petitioner in W.P.(C)
12617/2019 secured 1892 rank in the UR category and rank 809 in the
OBC Category.
5. The first round of counseling was held pursuant to the not ice dated
07.09.2019 and second round was held pursuant to the not ice dated
30.09.2019. Vide notice dated 25.10.2019, 3 rd round/mop up round
was announced and only those candidates who were from responden t
No. 2/college and their name was not present in the 1 st list or 2 nd list,
were allowed to participate. Both the petitioners participated in this
round.
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 3 of 8
6. The respondents Nos. 3, 4, 6 and 7 were found eligible in the stray
round and hence, granted admission, which is being challen ged in the
present writ petitions.
7. Mr. Saharya, learned counsel for the petitioners, has challenged the
notice for stray vacancy round issued on 25.10.2019.
8. He draws my attention to the reference Nos. 1 and 5 of the notic e
dated 25.10.2019, to state that only those students who w ere not
allotted any seats in any round, were eligible to participate in the stray
round.
9. The relevant paragraphs read as under:
―1. Only the candidates who have passed qualifying
examination i.e. BAMS from GGSIP University and already
registered with the University and have not been allotted
seat in PG Ayurveda through any rounds of counseling
(State/AIQ) are eligible to participate in the Offline Stat e
Quota Counseling.
It may please be noted that the candidates who have not
qualified AIAPGET 2019 and also are not registered with
GGSIPU are not eligible to participate in the counseling.
5. SCHEDULE FOR STRAY VACANCY ROUND OF
‗STATE QUOTE SEATS‘
Date Particulars Time
30.10.2019 All the REGISTERED CANDIDATES in person
(IRRESPECTIVE OF CATEGORIES), who have passed
BAMS from the affiliated college of Guru Gobind Singh
Indraprastha Uniyersity i.e. in Ch. Brahm Prakash ayurved
Charak Sansthan, New Delhi, and also qualified AIAPGET
02:30
p.m.
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 4 of 8
2019 exam and their names appear in the Merit List
displayed on University website on 09.09.2019.
Who is Eligible at this stage?
Only those candidates who have not been allotted seats in
any rounds of PG Ayurveda Counselling. .
As per the approved counselling scheme, candidates
admitted in round 1 & 2 holding their respective All India
Quota seats and candidates upgraded in round 3 from
Round 1 & 2 of All India PG Counselling are not allowed
to vacate their AIQ seats and also not allowed to further
participate in State Quota Counselling.
10. He states the since respondent Nos. 3, 4, 6 and 7 were allotted seats in
the first round of counseling in the All India and State level, they were
ineligible to participate in the stray round.
11. Mr. Bidhuri, learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent No. 1
and draws my attention to notice dated 07.09.2019 and more
particularly to paragraph No. 15, which reads as under:
―15. Withdrawal of Admission and Refund of Fee: The
allotted candidates may withdraw their admission upto 4 .00
P.M. on 16.09.2019. Such candidates shall visit the
Admissions Branch, GGSIP University, Sector 16C,
Dwarka, New Delhi alongwith their original admission slip
alongwith the prescribed format (Appendix 8 – Form For
Withdrawal of Admission – available in Part B, Admission
Brochure 2019-20).‖
12. He also draws my attention to FAQ and more particularly to
Question Nos. 45 and 50, which read as under:
―Q.No. 45 What is the permissibility to students to exercise
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 5 of 8
fresh choice during counseling?
Ans: The following matrix explains the above question:
Q.No. 50: Who is eligible for Stray Vacancy Round of
Deemed / Central Universities?
Ans: All registered candidates except the following three
categories are eligible for Stray Vacancy Round of
Deemed I Central Universities:
a) Candidates who joined the allotted seat in Round-2 o f
AIQ/ Deemed / Central Universities;
b) Candidates allotted a seat in Mop Up Round of
AACCC;
c) Candidates joined a sat in Mop Up Round AACCC.‖
13. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
14. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of S. Krishna Sradha v.
State of A.P., (2020) 17 SCC 465. Relevant paragraphs read as under:
“13. In light of the discussion/observations made hereinabove, a
meritorious candidate/student who has been denied an admission
in MBBS course illegally or irrationally by the authorit ies for no
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 6 of 8
fault of his/her and who has approached the Court in time and so
as to see that such a meritorious candidate may not have to
suffer for no fault of his/her, we answer the reference as under:
13.1. That in a case where candidate/student has approached t he
court at the earliest and without any delay and that the qu estion
is with respect to the admission in medical course all the efforts
shall be made by the court concerned to dispose of the
proceedings by giving priority and at the earliest.
13.2. Under exceptional circumstances, if the court finds that
there is no fault attributable to the candidate and the ca ndidate
has pursued his/her legal right expeditiously without an y delay
and there is fault only on the part of the authorities and/or there
is apparent breach of rules and regulations as well a s related
principles in the process of grant of admission which wo uld
violate the right of equality and equal treatment to the competing
candidates and if the time schedule prescribed — 30th
September, is over, to do the complete justice, the Court unde r
exceptional circumstances and in rarest of rare cases direct the
admission in the same year by directing to increase the s eats,
however, it should not be more than one or two seats and such
admissions can be ordered within reasonable time i.e. within one
month from 30th September i.e. cut-off date and under no
circumstances, the Court shall order any admission in the same
year beyond 30th October. However, it is observed that such
relief can be granted only in exceptional circumstances and in
the rarest of rare cases. In case of such an eventuality, the Cou rt
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 7 of 8
may also pass an order cancelling the admission given t o a
candidate who is at the bottom of the merit list of the c ategory
who, if the admission would have been given to a more
meritorious candidate who has been denied admission illega lly,
would not have got the admission, if the Court deems it fi t and
proper, however, after giving an opportunity of hearing to a
student whose admission is sought to be cancelled.
13.3. In case the Court is of the opinion that no relief o f
admission can be granted to such a candidate in the ver y
academic year and wherever it finds that the action of the
authorities has been arbitrary and in breach of the rule s and
regulations or the prospectus affecting the rights of th e students
and that a candidate is found to be meritorious and suc h
candidate/student has approached the court at the earliest and
without any delay, the court can mould the relief and direct t he
admission to be granted to such a candidate in the next academic
year by issuing appropriate directions by directing to increa se in
the number of seats as may be considered appropriate in the case
and in case of such an eventuality and if it is found th at the
management was at fault and wrongly denied the admissio n to
the meritorious candidate, in that case, the Court may direct to
reduce the number of seats in the management quota of that year,
meaning thereby the student/students who was/were denied
admission illegally to be accommodated in the next acad emic
year out of the seats allotted in the management quota.‖
(emphasis added)
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22
W.P.(C) 12516/2019 & W.P.(C) 12617/2019 Page 8 of 8
15. A perusal of the judgment shows that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has
observed that the Court can grant admission to a meritorious
candidate in a subsequent year, but such kind of relief is only to be
granted in rarest of the rare cases. This course of action should not be
ordinarily exercised.
16. In the present case, the petitioners are seeking admission pur suant to
an exam held in the year 2019-20, i.e. after a lapse of more than 5
years. If the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is
accepted, then that will lead to an outcome wherein the petition ers are
getting admissions in the Session 2026-2027 on the basis of exams
taken in the year 2019-2020. The same cannot be permitted.
Additionally, the petitioners are not more meritorious than t he
candidates who have been granted admission as all the candid ates
have secured a rank higher than that of the petitioners. Hence, th e
ratio of S. Krishna Sradha (supra) is not applicable.
17. A perusal of the notice dated 25.10.2019, and FAQs clearly
demonstrates that the ineligibility is applicable only to the candidates
who have been admitted, i.e. secured an admission. The respon dent
Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 have not been granted admission as they wi thdrew
the admission after first round of counseling. The said candi dates
have also filed undertaking to this effect. Hence, reference Nos. 1 and
5 are not applicable to the respondent Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6.
18. For the said reasons, the petitions are dismissed.
MARCH 30, 2026/ (sp) JASMEET SINGH, J
(Corrected and released on 11.04.2026)
Digitally Signed
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:13.04.2026
14:48:22