ORDER
1. The petitioner with a desire to seek admission to the first year MDBS Course during the academic year 1999-2000 appeared tor the EAMCET-1999 Examination, Initially he was assigned ‘721’ rank and subsequently on revision of the ranks in pursuance of certain directions issued by this Court in writ proceedings, he was assigned rank ‘572’. The NTR University of Health Sciences issued a notification on 11-11-1999 calling for applications from the eligible candidates for admission to the first year MBBS course during the academic year 1999-2000 and the prospective applicants were advised to submit, their applications on or before 5-00 p.m., on 6-12-1999. The petitioner herein admittedly did not make application on or before 6-12-1999. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the University to have the prescribed application form and since by that time the last date fixed by the University had expired, the petitioner was not given application form. That led to the petitioner filing this writ petition.
2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not supplying and receiving the application from the petitioners for admission to the first year MBBS course and in not permitting the petitioner for counselling as illegal and for a consequential direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner for counselling and for allotting a seat to him.
3. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner drawing the attention of the Court to what is slated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition would contend that the petitioner on account of his ill-health for a considerable time could not make the application within the stipulated time and in that view of the matter, the action of the respondents in refusing to issue application form to the petitioner on 15-12-1999 was totally unjustified and illegal. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would also contend that the petitioner is more meritorious than some of the applicants who were granted admission to first year MBBS course during the academic year 1999-2000.
5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-
University would, at the threshold, contend that the writ petition is misconceived; since there is no controversy that the petitioner did not make application on or before 6-12-1999, the University was not obligated to issue application form to the petitioner on 15-12-1999 and consider his claim for admission. Learned Counsel would also draw the attention of the Court to Regulation (v) and point out that the University was left with no discretion to entertain any application for admission filed after the last date fixed by the University.
6. The statutory regulations for admission into the first year MBBS/BDS course for the academic year 1999-2000 among other things, mandate mat the application form duly filled in with all the required enclosures should be delivered in person or sent by post so as to reach the Chairman, Under Graduate Admission Committee, NTR University of Health Sciences on or before 5-00 p.m., on 6-12-1999. Regulation (v) further provides that the applications received after the last date and time and those not accompanied by the required certificates or with incomplete entries or from ineligible candidates shall stand rejected automatically, (emphasis is supplied by the Court).
7. The regulations governing admission to the first year MBBS course are statutory instructions. The above noted Regulation (v) of the Regulations would make it abundantly clear that the University is left with no discretion at all to entertain any application received by it after the last date fixed by the University on any ground. On the other hand, Regulation (v) declares that the applications received after the last date and time shall stand rejected automatically, that is to say, by operation of law. That means the University is not required to endorse on the belated applications that they were rejected. Once it is shown that the application was made after the last date and time fixed by the University, by operation of the Regulation (v), those applications stand rejected automatically.
8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would appear and invoke compassion of the Court and highlight that here is a case where the petitioner student under unavoidable circumstances could not make application on or before 6-12-1999 and, therefore, the Court should not loose sight of that situation, and should do justice to the petitioner by issuing necessary directions to the University to admit him into the course to do complete justice. The Judge in deciding a hard case should not lay down a bad law. It is well settled by catena of decisions of the Supreme Court and this Court that under no circumstances, a writ of mandamus would lie to an authority to do something or not to do something in breach of public law, duties and obligations. Regulation (v) of the Regulations for admission, in unmistakable terms, mandates the University not to entertain any application received by it after the last date fixed by the University, and if the Court were to issue any direction to entertain the application of the petitioner for admission to the first year MBBS course during the academic year 1999-2000, it would tantamount to the Court directing the University to do something in breach of public law obligation. Such a course is not at all open to the Court. On the above short ground, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
9. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed without any order as to costs.
