Parity permits late NOC applications where extended admission deadlines leave similarly situated institutions time to apply.

The petitioner institution sought permission to apply for a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to conduct a Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology (DMLT) course for the 2026 academic year. It had missed the application deadline due to difficulties on its part.

In an earlier batch of cases, the Court had permitted similarly situated institutions to apply for renewal of NOCs by 24 August 2026, as a one-time measure, subject to an additional payment; the order expressly stated that it would have no precedential value.

The admission deadline was later extended from 30 September to 31 October 2026.

The petitioner sought the same opportunity, relying also on its claimed qualification, including a valid Fire Safety Certificate.

The authorities opposed relief, arguing that the earlier order was confined to the cases before the Court and could prompt similar claims by other institutions.

1. Whether the petitioner, despite missing the prescribed deadline and not participating in the earlier proceedings, could be permitted to apply for a fresh NOC on grounds of parity with institutions granted relief earlier.

2. Whether the extended admission deadline justified allowing the petitioner a time-bound opportunity to submit its application.

The petitioner invoked the High Court’s jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

The Court applied the principle of parity, holding that relief granted in similar matters may support similar directions in a later case where the relevant facts and circumstances warrant it.

It relied on State of Odisha v. Priyambada Pattanaik, SLP No. 10598 of 2024, decided on 9 September 2024, where the Supreme Court disposed of a later petition on the same terms as an earlier order despite that order’s statement that it was not to be treated as a precedent, because the same set of facts and circumstances arose in the same State.

The Court also considered its order dated 13 August 2026, which had allowed similarly situated institutions to apply by a fixed date, subject to additional payment.

Although the petitioner had not applied within the prescribed period and had not joined the earlier proceedings, the Court considered that the admission deadline had since been extended to 31 October 2026 and that the petitioner claimed to have acquired the necessary qualification, including a valid Fire Safety Certificate.

In light of these circumstances and the benefit previously granted to similarly situated institutions, the Court found no sufficient reason to deny relief on parity grounds.

Given the petitioner’s failure to demonstrate a diligent attempt to apply before the deadline, the Court imposed a higher additional payment of ₹60,000 and set a strict filing deadline.

It directed that no further extension would be granted if the petitioner missed that deadline.

Upon receipt of the application, the authorities were directed to decide it in accordance with law as soon as possible, preferably by 27 October 2026.

The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.