01Facts
The petitioner was provisionally allotted a BSMS seat at Government Siddha Medical College in the second round of State Quota counselling on 13 October 2026, paid the requisite fee and deposited her original certificates.
p. 3She later participated in the third round of counselling and opted for a seat at the National Institute of Siddha, Tambaram, under the All India Quota.
pp. 3–4The State Selection Committee subsequently notified her that her provisional State Quota allotment had been cancelled.
pp. 3–4The petitioner said she could not join the All India Quota seat because the fourth respondent had not returned her certificates unless she paid Rs.1,00,000.
p. 4The respondents submitted that cancellation followed automatically from her opting for an All India Quota seat and that the State Quota seat should remain available for the next counselling round.
p. 502Issues
i.Whether the petitioner’s provisional State Quota allotment could be cancelled after she opted for a seat at the National Institute of Siddha under the All India Quota.
pp. 3–5ii.Whether the respondents should be directed to restore the petitioner’s provisional allotment at Government Siddha Medical College.
p. 503Law Applied
The petition invoked the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
p. 2The Court cited no statutory provision, precedent, or specific legal test in its reasoning.
pp. 5–6It granted relief by reference to the circumstances of the case and the petitioner’s future as a student aspiring to become a doctor.
p. 504Reasoning
The respondents argued that the prospectus made a candidate ineligible for the State Quota seat once the candidate opted for an All India Quota seat, and that the State allotment’s cancellation was automatic.
p. 5The Court did not analyse the prospectus provision or resolve the competing arguments by reference to a stated legal rule.
p. 5Instead, considering the effect on the petitioner’s future, it directed the second and third respondents to restore her provisional allotment.
p. 505Holding
The Court allowed the writ petition and directed the second and third respondents to restore the petitioner’s provisional allotment at the fourth respondent college.
p. 5It further directed that the seat not be shown as vacant in the forthcoming stray round of counselling, and stated that the order was a one-time measure that would not set a precedent for other candidates.
p. 5No costs were ordered, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
p. 6Original Court PDF
Janakipriya AvsNational Commission for Homeopathy
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
