The High Court reaffirmed that strict adherence to admission instructions—including requirements for the fee to be routed through specified NRI/foreign accounts—is mandatory in NRI quota medical admissions. Inadvertent or technical lapses by applicants do not entitle them to relief. The judgment upholds existing procedures, providing binding precedent for future admissions under NRI quotas in Haryana.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWP/25778/2025 of NIDHISH CHUGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS |
| CNR | PHHC011400792025 |
| Date of Registration | 29-08-2025 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF |
| Judgment Author | ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (oral) |
| Concurring or Dissenting Judges | ROHIT KAPOOR, J. (concurring) |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA |
| Bench | Division Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. & Rohit Kapoor, J. |
| Precedent Value | Binding in Punjab and Haryana; persuasive elsewhere |
| Type of Law |
|
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi | The Court held that express compliance with the mode of fee payment as stipulated in the admission instructions (i.e., payment through NRE/NRI/NRO/Foreign bank account as per Clause 5 of Notification dated 10.07.2025) is mandatory for NRI quota admissions. Any deviation—even if inadvertent—renders the admission invalid and the authorities are justified in denying admission or disqualifying the candidate from further rounds. The instructions have binding force; their breach is sufficient ground to forfeit admission, and authorities are not required to condone non-compliance arising out of candidate error. The only concession allowed is liberty for the petitioner to apply afresh in further rounds if available. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner, allotted an NRI quota seat in the Master of Dental Surgery (NEET MDS) course, paid the provisional tuition fee in INR from an Indian account rather than via the stipulated NRI/Foreign account. Due to this breach of Clause 5 of the Notification dated 10.07.2025, their admission was cancelled and the seat was released for stray round counselling. The petitioner admitted the error and sought relief on the ground of inadvertence. |
| Citations | None indicated in the judgment. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Punjab and Haryana; authorities administering medical admissions in Haryana. |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts in India; regulatory bodies overseeing NRI quota admissions; Supreme Court, if considering similar procedural questions. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reiterates that express procedural requirements outlined in government admission notifications are strictly enforceable; mere technical or inadvertent errors by candidates will not suffice for judicial relief.
- The route of payment (NRE/NRI/NRO/Foreign bank account) for NRI quota fee is a substantive eligibility condition, not a mere procedural formality.
- Even where the candidate had funds in an NRI account, actual compliance with payment routing is indispensable.
- Affirms that university/admission authorities’ strict adherence to notified admission processes is not arbitrary or illegal.
- Offers limited leniency: affected candidates may reapply in subsequent rounds if seats are available, but original non-compliance is not condonable.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court examined the Notification dated 10.07.2025, particularly Clause 5, which mandates that provisional tuition fee for NRI quota admissions is to be paid exclusively through NRE/NRI/NRO/Foreign bank account.
- It was admitted by the petitioner that, although funds were available in an eligible account, the payment was made from an Indian account due to inadvertence.
- The respondents (University) contended that compliance with these prescribed conditions is crucial and non-fulfilment disqualifies the candidate.
- The Court held the requirement of fee payment mode as an essential element of the admission scheme, not a mere technicality.
- The Court found no illegality or arbitrariness in the authorities’ act of denying admission and releasing the seat.
- While dismissing the petition, the Court allowed the petitioner to participate afresh in stray rounds if seats were available, treating the error as inadvertent but uncured by law.
- No reliance was placed on any earlier judgment; decision rests on interpretation and application of the current admission notification.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Claimed to have possessed requisite amount in NRI account.
- Fee deposited from an Indian account by inadvertent error.
- Suffered disqualification from further rounds due to this mistake.
- Sought direction for relaxation and acceptance of payment as compliance.
Respondent University
- Petitioner failed to comply with specific instructions (Clause 5) regarding payment mode under NRI quota.
- No relief can be granted due to breach of admission requirements.
Factual Background
The petitioner secured admission in the NRI quota for the Master of Dental Surgery (NEET MDS) course. As per Notification dated 10.07.2025, payment of tuition fee was required through an NRE/NRI/NRO/Foreign bank account. However, due to inadvertence, the fee was paid from an Indian account. This resulted in cancellation of the petitioner’s admission and release of the seat for stray round counselling. The petitioner conceded the mistake and sought the Court’s intervention for relief.
Statutory Analysis
The Court interpreted Clause 5 of the Medical Education and Research Department, Haryana Notification dated 10.07.2025. The provision stipulated that provisional tuition fees for NRI quota must be paid only through NRE/NRI/NRO/Foreign Bank Account, via the official admission portal, but allowed payment in equivalent INR. The Court treated the mode of payment as a substantive, not procedural, requirement and held that non-compliance with this clause results in forfeiture of the admission claim.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or separate concurring opinion was given; both judges concurred.
Alert Indicators
- Precedent Followed – Strict compliance with notified admission norms reaffirmed.
Citations
- No specific SCC, AIR, MANU, or neutral citations are indicated in the judgment.
- Matter noted as CWP-25778-2025, Date of Decision: 01.09.2025, in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.