Bombay HC Held that Conducting Entrance Exams is Valid

Must Read

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated...

Delhi High Court Directs Delhi Jal Board To Make Supply of Potable Drinking Water

The High Court of Delhi in the matter of Delhi Sainik Cooperation Housing Ltd. v. Union of India &...

Follow us

A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court consisting of Justice Milind N. Jadhav and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, in the case of Maharashtra Medical Education & Research Centre & other v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., held that the colleges that conducted their entrance exams before the Supreme Court judgment Medical Council of India v. Christian Medical College are valid in law.

Brief Facts of the Case

This case has been a subject of many decisions by the High Court. The petitioner 2, a minority unaided college managed by petitioner 1, started offering a bachelor’s degree in physiotherapy in the academic year 2004-05 and a master’s degree in physiotherapy from 2010-11. Till the year 2015-16, the petitioner conducted their own entrance exams. For the academic year 2015-16, the petitioner applied to Medical Education, Maharashtra (Respondent 3) to conduct its own entrance exam, which was rejected by the authority. This lead to the subsequent filings before the Court:

  1. Writ Petition No.  5107 of 2015: Bombay HC rejected the decision of the authority and allowed the petitioner to conduct their own entrance exam. Before the decision, the respondent promulgated an ordinance, which subsequently became an act: Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Fees) Act, 2015 for the regulation of admission & fees in unaided colleges. The Court held that the petitioner can conduct its own exam for the year 2015-16, and the act shall be applicable from the next academic year.
  2. Civil Application (Decided on 29th March 2016): After conducting the entrance exam and declaring the merit list, the petitioner filed requisite formalities with the concerned authorities. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik (Respondent 4), didn’t accept the eligibility proposal of the selected students on the grounds that it wasn’t made a party to the case, the copy of the order was not served, and there was no direction for the registration of selected students. The Court rejected the arguments of Respondent 4 and ordered them to follow requisite formalities to admit the students.

The issue in the present case is that after the decision on 29th March 2016, the Respondent 4 stated in a letter to the petitioner that the admission of the students is temporary and subject to the final outcome of the Apex Court. Moreover, Respondent 4 provided information containing the list of colleges in which admissions are pending, and the petitioner’s name was on the list.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The counsel for the petitioner submitted the following arguments:

  1. The Court has already issued directions to Respondent 4 in its previous orders to accept the synopsis and admission of the students. Therefore no ground of withholding admission arises.
  2. Bombay HC in its division bench judgment A. Inamdar v. the State of Maharashtra decided on 11th October 2018, was faced with similar facts and was decided against the respondents. Identical relief should be granted in the present case as well.
  3. The present issue is not Res Integra and was already dealt by the Court in A. Inamdar case.

Respondent’s Arguments

The counsel for the respondent submitted the following arguments:

  1. The Prayer made in this case is omnibus as the relief sought by the petitioners, including granting of internship certificate and degree certificate to the admitted students, is subject to the completion of the said course.
  2. Without completion of the said internship and course, the respondent cannot grant the required certificates.

Court’s Observations

  1. Some clarity has to be provided in A. Inamdar’s case along with certain other judgments of the Supreme Court.
  2. In A. Inamdar case, the petitioner was an unaided minority college that filed an application before the authority to conduct entrance exams for their dental course for the academic year 2013-14, which was rejected on the ground that for the academic year 2013-14, the Dental Council of India issued some regulations according to which the admission for dental colleges shall be done through National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET) exam. This was challenged in Supreme Court and in the case of Christian Medical College v. Union of India (2014) 2 SCC 305, where the Court held that such regulations are unconstitutional and allowed all the institutions to conduct their own entrance exam.
  3. This case was reviewed, and in Medical Council of India v. Christian Medical College, (2016) 4 SCC 342, the Court reversed its previous judgment. So the basic question before the Bombay High Court in A. Inamdar’s case was whether the entrance exam held by the institution for the academic year 2013-14 after Christian Medical Council judgment is invalid? The Court held that it’s not invalid as, till the time the judgment was not reversed, it was a binding precedent.
  4. In the present case, taking the support of P.A. Inamdar case, the court observed:

“22. The students, 30 for undergraduate and 1 for postgraduate, were admitted to their respective courses following the entrance test and admission process undertaken by petitioner No.2 on the strength of the order of this Court. Subsequently, on further orders of this Court, they were allowed to appear in the respective examinations and their results were directed to be declared. Having gone through the entire exercise on orders of this Court, it is now not open to respondent Nos.3 and 4 to question admission of those students. As already pointed out, no affidavit has been filed. Even in their respective submissions, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 did not assail or question the entrance test and the consequential admission process on merit.”

Court’s Decision

Since the entrance exam conducted by the petitioner falls in the time before the judgment of SC in its review case, the college’s entrance exam is valid in law. Hence. the respondent can by no means withhold the admission of the students.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum of compensation have not yet...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated 28.10.2020 disqualified the petitioner and...

Delhi High Court Directs Delhi Jal Board To Make Supply of Potable Drinking Water

The High Court of Delhi in the matter of Delhi Sainik Cooperation Housing Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors held that right to...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Security To BJP Leader Alleged for Not Supporting Farmers Protest

The Order had come in the form of a Writ Petition filed by Tikshan Sood under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition before...

Lahore High Court Outlaws Two-Finger Virginity Test

The Lahore High Court in Pakistan has outlawed the use and conduct of virginity tests, namely, the use of the “two-finger” virginity test and...

London Court Rejects Assange’s Extradition – What Happens Now? 

Earlier last week, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, sitting in the Westminster Magistrates’ Court denied the Government of the U.S.A.'s request to the U.K. to...

Calcutta High Court Decides in Favor of Contractor as He Accidentally Pays an Excessively High Amount

Introduction The present writ petition has been filed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to revoke the Petitioner’s offer as...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -