The Petitioner did not register his grievance with regard to his failure to make payment by online mode before 12.00 noon but instead registered his grievance on 31/10/2021 after 12.00 noon. Thus, the petitioner has failed to follow the rules despite being aware of the same now cannot be heard to say that he be allowed to continue his admission and be allowed to make payment of the Seat Acceptance Fee or that he be allotted another seat after the closure of the process of admission as provided for in the Rules. Such an observation was made by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court before Hon’ble Justice S.J. KATHAWALLA & Hon’ble Justice ABHAY AHUJA in the matter of Prince Jaibir Singh Through guardian Mr. Jaibir Singh vs Union of India & ors [WRIT PETITION (L) NO.26135 OF 2021] on 12.11.2021.
The fact of the case was that the petitioner passed Joint Entrance Examination ( JEE) Advanced 2021 and scored Scheduled Caste (SC) Rank 864 and was allotted a seat at the IIT, Bombay for Civil Engineering (4 Years, Bachelor of Technology) (B.Tech. Course). Pursuant to the Business Rules XVII Clause 40 for Joint Seat Allocation for the Academic Programs offered by IITs, NITs, IIEST, IIITs, and other GFTIs for the academic year 2021-22, Petitioner followed the steps mentioned therein. However, at the time of payment of seat allocation fees, he failed to pay the same due to technical error and server error. It was the plea of the petitioner to direct respondent no 2 to accept his fees and allocate the seat accordingly.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that the petitioner despite having failed to make an online payment right from 9.51 p.m. on 30/10/2021 up to 11.44 a.m. on 31/10/2021 ought to have sought help by registering his grievance as provided in Rule 77 before the activity in the said process was to close i.e. before 12.00 noon on 31st October 2021, rather he sought help after 12:00 noon on 31.10.2021 when the process was closed. The Petitioner has failed to follow the rules despite being aware of the same now cannot be heard to say that he be allowed to continue his admission and be allowed to make payment of the Seat Acceptance Fee or that he be allotted another seat after the closure of the process of admission as provided for in the Rules.
Additionally, The Hon’ble High Court held that the said Rules are binding on all the participants as the candidates have entered the process by submitting to the said Rules including the petitioner.
Finally, in view of the aforesaid, the Hon’ble High Court dismissed the appeal.
Judgment Reviewed by: Rohan Kumar Thakur