NEET: Madras High Court Grants ₹1 Lakh Compensation To Aspirant Who Missed Counselling Registration Due To Poor Internet Connectivity In His Village
State obliged to compensate students deprived of entitlement on account of digital divide, Court said.
Observing that digitisation should lead to empowerment and not deprivation, the Madras High Court recently directed the Director of Medical Education and its Selection Committee to award a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh to a student who failed to register himself for the NEET counselling process due to technical glitches and poor internet connectivity in his village, thereby losing...
Observing that digitisation should lead to empowerment and not deprivation, the Madras High Court recently directed the Director of Medical Education and its Selection Committee to award a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh to a student who failed to register himself for the NEET counselling process due to technical glitches and poor internet connectivity in his village, thereby losing admission prospects.
The Madurai Bench of Justice GR Swaminathan observed that the state had an obligation to compensate a student who was deprived of his entitlement due to "digital divide". The court also directed the Department to ensure that the selection procedure is conducted in such a way so that incidents like these do not occur in future.
If on account of the digital divide, a student is deprived of an entitlement, the State is obliged to compensate him. I, therefore, direct the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh as compensation to the petitioner herein within a period of eight weeks. I also direct the respondents to ensure that the selection process is conducted and finalized in such a way so as to ensure that incidents such as the one on hand do not recur. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
In the present case, the Petitioner who had scored 409 marks in the NEET Examination could not register his name for counseling on time due to poor internet connectivity. Even when the connectivity was good, the One Time Password was not generated on time. The petitioner later learned that persons who scored as low as 108 marks were also allotted seats under the management quota. Thus, he approached the high court.
The respondent department, on the other hand, contended that the counselling for the academic year 2021-2022 has already been completed and that there was no vacancies. Though they also contended that the Petitioner had not obtained the requisite marks to be considered for counseling, the court was not inclined to support that contention. The court observed that if the petitioner's marks was below the cut off, he would not have even been called for counseling.
The court agreed with the respondent that no direction could be issued to direct the admission of the petitioner for any medical course for the academic year 2021-22. At the same time, the court felt it necessary to address the digital divide which had caused this situation.
In addition, the court relied on the decision in Asha v. Pt.B.D.Sharma University of Health Sciences and ors which was confirmed by a full bench in S.Krishna Sradha v. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors. wherein the court had held that wherever the court finds that action of the authorities has been arbitrary, contrary to the judgments of this Court and violative of the Rules, Regulations and conditions of the prospectus, causing prejudice to the rights of the students, the Court shall award compensation to such students. Thus, the court deemed it fit to direct respondents to compensate the petitioner.
Case Title: K.Lal Bhagadhur Sasthri v. The Director of Medical Education and another
Case No: W.P(MD)No.7294 of 2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 300
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. D. Srinivasaraghavan for Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. V. Om Prakash, Government Advocate