Rathod Sneh Rajendrakumar vs. The Admission Committee For Professional Post Graduate Medical Educational Courses

ITEM NO.58

COURT NO.3

SECTION III

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) $No(s)$ . 9524/2024

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06-03-2024 in LPA No. 224/2024 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad)

SUYESH BHARAT SINGH KRISHALI & ORS.

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

ADMISSION COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL POST MEDICAL EDUCATION COURSES & ORS.

$Respondent(s)$

(IA No.99408/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.103102/2024-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES )

Date: 22-07-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN

For Petitioner(s)

Mr. Nikhil Goel, Sr. Adv.

• Mr. Ashutosh Ghade, AOR
• Ms. Siddhi Gupta, Adv.
• Mr. Adithya Koshy Roy, Adv.
• Ms. Naveen Goel, Adv.

Mr. Nimit Bhimjiyani, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Deepanwita Privanka, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

$1.$ Leave to delete respondent No. 9 is granted at the risk of the petitioners.

The Mr. Nikhil Goel, learned senior counsel appearing for the $\overline{\text{p}}$ etitioners states that though by way of ad interim order(s) dated 06.05.2024, the parties were directed to maintain status quo as existing prior to the date of the impugned order, the same has not been complied with by respondent No.1.

3. Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No.1 states that learned Single Judge of the High Court vide order dated 26th February, 2024, had directed to respondent No.1 to confirm the admission of the petitioners within a period of one week from the date of the receipt of the said order, upon the petitioners completing the requisite formalities within the time limit granted by the Admission Committee.

4. She submits that since the requisite formalities were not completed within time limit granted by Admission Committee, the order of status quo meant that the petitioners' admission should not be confirmed.

5. We are, prima facie, not impressed with the submission made on behalf of respondent No.1. In any case, in order to avoid confusion, we direct that the directions issued by the learned Single judge of the High Court, in particular, in paragraph 20 of the order dated 26th of February, 2024, shall be complied by respondent No.1 and other respondents in letter and spirit. Needless to state that this shall not be taken as an observation on the merits of the matter.

6. List these matters after four weeks.

(DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

2