No Conspiracy Unlike Vyapam Case: Allahabad High Court Quashes Cancellation Of B.Tech Admissions By Gorakhpur Based Varsity

The Allahabad High Court has quashed the orders issued by Madan Mohan Malviya University of Technology, Gorakhpur, cancelling the admissions of 67 second and final-year B.Tech students for allegedly forging their way in.

A single bench of Justice Kshitij Shailendra refused to draw parallels from the Vyapam case where Apex Court, finding established instances of fraud, cancelled the admissions of not only those who had completed their courses but also those who were engaged in medical practice for years after completion of their courses.

Justice Shailendra observed,

"In the Vypam case before the Supreme Court, there was conspiracy in between the petitioners and the officers of the concerned Board/college etc. Allegations of manipulations and forgery were also found by the Supreme Court as substantiated. However, in the present case, the nature of documents annexed to the writ petition and various affidavits clearly demonstrate due verification not only through online but off-line process at the level of University authorities including Dean and Head."

The bench observed that endorsements were made by the Coordinator of Counselling as well as the Admission Cell, details of students were uploaded on the official website at every stage and even IDs were generated. Further, verified reports were uploaded time and again and if, at any point in time, a few documents could not be produced by the candidates, justification was placed on record by them.

Thus, it observed,

"Grounds contained in the orders impugned for cancelling the admissions, that is the provisional seat allotment letters were forged, do not stand established against the petitioners that is to say that there is no finding that the petitioners have forged the said letters as, admittedly, no inquiry has been conducted in that regard or against the students. In so far as the allegation that the ranks which the petitioners claimed as obtained by them, were in fact the ranks obtained by some other students, Sri Upadhyay [University's counsel] did not dispute that even those students were allowed to study and are studying in their respective courses. Meaning thereby that by admitting the students, nobody’s right has been taken away and it is not a case where the petitioners have replaced some other students even if some discrepancy with regard to ranking obtained has been pressed on behalf of respondents."

The case pertained to admissions for the academic year 2020-21.

The Petitioners’ case is that after being successful in the entrance exam for B.Tech., provisional seat allotment letters were issued to them, confirmation fees was deposited and thereafter, roll numbers, identity cards and e-mail IDs were issued to them. Petitioners contended that they had participated in all semester examinations, and deposited fees timely and most of them are in the last or second last year of their respective engineering courses.

Counsel for the Petitioner alleged that the “authorities were playing a game of hide and seek” as they were involved in some alleged infirmity in the admission process and though an inquiry was also set up but no action was taken even against the authorities. Blame was being shifted on the students in their last years of college after they had appeared at every stage in the admission process and submitted all documents at that time, it was argued.

Counsel for the Respondent College alleged that since the petitioners had failed to provide all documents required as per the show cause notice, their admission to the University could not be justified. Reliance was placed on Vyapam Case to state that the Apex Court had cancelled admissions even though the students were on the verge of completing their course.

On perusing the report of an inquiry conducted against the authorities involved in the admission process, the Court noted that there was no mention of any fraud or forgery of the documents on behalf of the petitioners (students). It was noted that there were discrepancies in the registration number of candidates as they were manipulated to adjust the petitioners. However, no action had been contemplated against the University officials.

“The aforesaid contents of the inquiry report reflect that the attempt of the respondent officers of the University is to somehow shield their officials and most interesting part of the inquiry report is that Mr. P.K. Singh, who, being Dean of Admissions, was instrumental in not only verifying the documents of the petitioners at every stage, in collecting fees, in cash, and had issued provisional seat allotment letters, his role has been found to be almost negligible and as a matter of fact he has been completely exonerated from the proceedings.”

Accordingly, the Court held that the admissions of the petitioners could not be cancelled when they were on the verge of completing their courses.

Case Title: Milind Saxena And 15 Others vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 301

Counsel for Petitioner: Awadhesh Kumar Malviya, Sr. Advocate

Counsel for Respondent: C.S.C., Dhananjay Awasthi, Rajan Upadhyay

Click Here To Read/Download Order