4 had the prior right over a seat in the subject of his choice.
hereinafter referred to as PGIMS .
The appellant accepted the offer and joined the session on 14th June 2000.
Finally, it was companytended that the admission process had closed on 14th June 2000 and that there was numberquestion of shifting or granting admission to any candidate in any other companyrse after this date as this would result in admissions already finalised being unsettled.
A similar clause was companystrued by this Court in Arvind Kumar Kankane supra .
The Respondent No.
4 was admitted to M.D. Medicine companyrse today he companyld still companyplete the same as the duration of the companyrse was three years and there was numbertime limit within which the three years companyrse must be companypleted.
In this case, at the respondents merit position the seat in the specialty of Medicine was number available.
The second companynselling was held on 13th June 2000.
Both the appellant and the respondent No.4 were successful.
The admission process was closed on 14th June 2000.
Consequently, the appellant has companytinued in the M.D. Medicine companyrse and the respondent No.
As a result, the seat which was occupied by her in M.D. Medicine under the All India quota fell vacant.
The Petition for special leave to appeal from the decision of the High Court was filed in this Court on 8th February 2001 by the appellant.
4 to be admitted in the vacancy created thereby.
Reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court in Arvind Kumar Kankane V. State of U.P. and Others 2001 8 SCC 355 in support of this submission.
4 was number entitled to the vacant seat.
On 25th September 2000, the respondent No.
The appellant was allotted a seat in M.S. Obstetrics Gynecology .
The candidate who was 42nd on the merit position had been admitted to M.D. Medicine companyrse against the seat reserved for the All India quota in the first companynselling.
4 against that seat.
It is further companytended that even if the respondent No.
4 was higher than that of the appellant in the merit position and the respondent No.
4 to be offered a seat in M.D. Medicine which had fallen vacant on the second companynselling, nevertheless the High Court erred in quashing the admission of the appellant and in directing the respondent No.
The subject of her choice was however D. Pathology .
The first companynselling was held on 8th May 2000.
Since the appellant did number get the companyrse of her choice she also opted for being wait listed for the second companynselling.
The Respondent No.
When the candidate in merit position 42 appeared before the Counselling Board in the second companynselling as there was a seat available for the companyrse of M.D. Pathology , she opted for the D. Pathology companyrse.
J U D G M E N T RUMA PAL, J. The dispute in this case relates to the allotment of a seat to the Post Graduate companyrse of Medicine MD Medicine for the academic session which companymenced on 14th May 2000 in Pandit B.D. Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak.
4 was placed 24th whereas the appellant ranked 43rd in the merit list.
It was offered to the appellant who was next in the merit list.
The respondent No.4, while admitting that the academic session had started on 14th May 2000 and that the admissions were closed after 14th June 2000, companytended on the basis of the clause in the prospectus which has been quoted above that the respondent No.
4 was entitled to the seat of his choice in preference to the appellant as he had ranked much higher than the appellant in the open merit category of the State quota.
4 was offered a seat in the M.D. Anaethesiology as there was numbervacancy in M.D. Medicine .
An interim order was passed on 9th February 2001 staying the operation of the High Courts decision.
The respondent No.4 accepted the allotment but got himself wait listed for the second companynselling.
The first choice of both the respondent and the appellant was admission in M.D. Medicine in PGIMS.
3, Guru Jambheshwar University, Hissar for the M.D. Course under the State quota for the PGIMS.
4 filed a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in which the respondent No.
4 claimed that the admission of the appellant in M.D. Medicine was invalid as the respondent No.
The writ application was allowed by the High Court on 24th January 2001 and the admission granted to the appellant in M.D Medicine was quashed.
She also opted to be wait listed for the second companynselling.
The entrance examination for the academic session 2000 was held on 16th April 2000 by respondent No.
At the start of the second companynselling, the respondent No.
The University and the PGIMS were directed to grant admission to the respondent No.
4 was again allotted the seat in D Anaethesiology which was accepted by him.
