N.B.

T Law College

Year 2023– 2024

Writ Petition No. 364 of 2024

Presented Before – Faculty Incharge

Prof. Mrs. Hema S. Burung

Presented By
– Student Advocate
Tripti Sanjay Jagtiani
LLB -III,
(For petitioner)

Student Advocate
Sanjay Kishor Jagtiani
LLB - III,
(For Respondent)
 Table of content

Sr.no. Index Page no.

10
 Section

Statute Involved Section

Constitution of India Article 32

Constitution of India Article21A

 VAKALATNAMA

In The Supreme Court

Civil Writ petition No. 364/2023

In Matter Of

Fariha Hussain Sheikh ………………….. (Petitioner)

Vs

UNION OF INDIA ..………………… (Respondent)

I / We the above petitioner do hereby appoint Mrs.Tripti Sanjay

Jagtiani, Student Advocate, to act, appears and plead for Me / Us in the
above matters. In witness were of I / We have set my / our hands to
this writing .

Place:
Date: / / 2024

Signature of petitioner Tripti Sanjay Jagtiani

Farriha Hussain Shaikh Student Advocate For petitioner
 VAKALATNAMA

In The Supreme Court

Civil Writ petition No. 364/2023

In Matter Of

Fariha Hussain Sheikh ………………….. (Petitioner)

Vs

UNION OF INDIA ..………………… (Respondent)

I / We the above petitioner do hereby appoint Mr.Sanjay Kishor

Jagtiani, Student Advocate, to act, appears and plead for Me / Us in the
above matters. In witness were of I / We have set my / our hands to
this writing .

Place:
Date: / / 2024

Signature of Respondent Sanjay Kishor Jagtiani

Student Advocate For petitioner
In the Supreme Court of India Memorandum of Petition
Civil Writ petition No. 364 of 2024

Fariha Hussain Shaikh

Ag- 24. Occ_Student ……..petitioner
R/O – Chandigarh

V/s
UNION OF INDIA. …. Respondent

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR,

1) The Petitioner herein is the citizen of India and is

permanent resident of Chandigarh & therefore entitled to
invoke the Writ Jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India .

2) The facts, in brief, leading to the filing of the present

petition are as follows:

I. A Memorandum was circulated by the government

Of India through the Ministry of Health and Welfare
on October 2023 .In which guidelines for the
allocation of the general pool for the MBBS/BDS
course for the year 2023-2024 was issued.
II. The department of Health and Welfare through its
official notification on November 23, 2023 passed a
list of candidates who were nominated by campus
pool for MBBS/MDS.
III. Through a communication dated Jan 2024, issued
by the Administration of the Union Territory of
Chandigarh, the Director of health services
Chandigarh forwarded the list Of selected
candidates from Chandigarh to be admitted in the
central pool The Petitioner was allotted to Ferguson
Medical College.
IV. In that list Petitioner was allotted at Fergussion
Medical College Chandigarh .It is therefefore
expected that The petitioner should have been
grant admission to the allotted college through
campus pool by Ministry of Health and Welfare.
V. The petitioners has been nominated by the Director
of health services Chandigarh but their admission
have not been confirmed despite other similarly
nominated students being admitted to different
institutions.
VI. The grievance is that though the petitioners have
been duly nominated by DHSC the admission
process of the petitioners has not been confirmed.
even though other similarly placed students
nominated by the DHSC , who were allotted to
different institutions, have had their admissions
confirmed.
VII. Therefore, a writ petition under Article 32 was
filed by the petitioner under Article 32 of the Indian
Constitution .As the right to education was deprived
by the college to admit petitioner without any
reasonable grounds.
3) As the petitioner belongs to Muslim religion they were
discriminated for seeking admission to their colleges
nominated by the DHSC.

4) By virtue of such characteristics as caste, class,

gender,Religion, disability and geographical region
imposes formidable obstacles on The path of petitioner to
accessing quality education.

5) The writ petitions before this Court under Article 32 of

the Constitution Have been instituted for seeking
directions to facilitate the students to be Admitted
respectively at Fergussion Medical College so as to
facilitate them to pursue Their studies for the MBBS
degree course.
 PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court

may kindly be pleased to:
1) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction for admission
formalities for the Petitioner be completed at the
Fergussion Medical College immediately .
2) That this Court be pleased to direct the Respondent to
give admission s to the Petitioner and to comply with pool
campus nomination list.
3) Any other relief and just the Hon’ble court may think fit
on behalf of The petitioner.:

Place:
Date:

Petitioner Tripti Sanjay Jagtiani

Student Advocate
 Affidavit

I, Petioner Fariha hussain Shaikh, hereby state on solemn

affirmation that whatever state in the above application is
true and correction is best of knowledge and for its
corrections I sign below.

1) The Petitioner herein is the citizen of India and is

permanent resident of Chandigarh & therefore entitled to
invoke the Writ Jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India .
2) The facts, in brief, leading to the filing of the present
petition are as follows:
VIII. A Memorandum was circulated by the
government Of India through the Ministry of
Health and Welfare on October 2023 .In which
guidelines for the allocation of the general pool
for the MBBS/BDS course for the year 2023-2024
was issued.
IX. The department of Health and Welfare through
its official notification on November 23, 2023
passed a list of candidates who were nominated
by campus pool for MBBS/MDS.
X. Through a communication dated Jan 2024,
issued by the Administration of the Union
Territory of Chandigarh, the Director of health
services Chandigarh forwarded the list Of
selected candidates from Chandigarh to be
admitted in the central pool The Petitioner was
allotted to Ferguson Medical College.
Unfortunately ,
XI. In that list Petitioner was allotted at Fergussion
Medical College Chandigarh .It is therefefore
expected that The petitioner should have been
grant admission to the allotted college through
campus pool by Ministry of Health and Welfare.
 XII. The petitioners has been nominated by the
Director of health services Chandigarh but their
admission have not been confirmed despite
other similarly nominated students being
admitted to different institutions .
XIII. The grievance is that though the petitioners
have been duly nominated by DHSC the
admission process of the petitioners has not
been confirmed. even though other similarly
placed students nominated by the DHSC , who
were allotted to different institutions, have had
their admissions confirmed.
XIV. Therefore, a writ petition under Article 32 was
filed by the petitioner under Article 32 of the
Indian Constitution .As the right to education
was deprived by the college to admit petitioner
without any reasonable grounds.
3)As the petitioner belongs to Muslim religion they were
discriminated for seeking admission to their colleges
nominated by the DHSC .
4)By virtue of such characteristics as caste, class,
gender,Religion, disability and geographical region
imposes formidable obstacles on The path of
petitioner to accessing quality education.
5)The writ petitions before this Court under Article 32 of
the Constitution Have been instituted for seeking
directions to facilitate the students to be Admitted
respectively at Fergussion Medical College so as to
facilitate them to pursue Their studies for the MBBS
degree course.

Place:
Date: / /
….……………..
Petitioner
 Verification

I, Appellant Fariha Hussain sheikh Age:- 24 occupation:-

student Adreess:- Chandigarh do herby state on solemn
affirmation that whatever stated in the above application
is true correct to the best of my knowledge and for its
correctness I sigh below.

Place:
Date: / /

….……… ……..
Petitioner
Issue raised before the court: -

1) Whether fundamental rights include right to higher or professional

education?

2) Whether it is appropriate to curb the calibre of a student on the

basis of caste, class, gender, religion, disability and geographical
region?

3) Whether it is fair to the students to deprive them of the

professional education even though they are nominated under the
central pool?
In the Supreme Court of India Memorandum of Petition
Civil Writ petition No. 364 of 2024

Fariha Hussain Shaikh ……..petitioner

V/s
UNION OF INDIA. …. Respondent

WRITTEN ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

1) It was seen that other selected students were admitted in their

allotted colleges/Institution but the petitioner was Intentionaly
deprived From seeking her educational Rights.
2) By this particular judgment, the case not only helps the students to
get into the colleges they were allotted by the central pool but also
sets an example in front of society that education of every student is
important and has given fair judgement.
3) Firstly, it is crucial to address the very clear, injustice faced by the
petitioner. Despite being duly nominated by the Administration of
Chandigarh adhering to the guidelines set forth by the Indian
authorities, they were unjustly denied admission to their respective
colleges. This denial not only violates their fundamental right to
education but also undermines the credibility of the nomination
process itself.
4) Furthermore, the petitioner contends that her right to higher and
professional education was unlawfully infringed upon, solely on the
basis of caste, class, race, or place of birth.
5) Such discriminatory practices have no place in a democratic society
governed by the rule of law. Denying someone access to education
based on arbitrary factors perpetuates inequality and hinders social
progress.
6) Moreover, it has come to light that other students who were
selected through similar processes were granted admission to their
allotted colleges. This glaring discrepancy highlights the arbitrary
and discriminatory nature of the decisions made in the case of the
petitioners. Equal treatment under the law is a cornerstone of our
legal system, and it is evident that this principle has been violated in
this instance.
7) Additionally, while the Right to Professional Education may not
be explicitly enumerated in the Constitution of India, it should
unequivocally be considered a fundamental right of every citizen.
8) Access to education, especially in professional fields, is
essential for personal development and societal advancement.
Denying individuals this right not only deprives them of
opportunities but also undermines the principles of equality and
justice enshrined in our constitution.
9) In conclusion, Your Honor, the denial of admission to the
petitioners based on arbitrary grounds is a clear violation of their
fundamental rights and goes against the principles of equality and
justice.
10) It is imperative that this court intervenes to rectify this
injustice and ensure that the petitioners are granted the rightful
access to education they deserve.
11) Is Therefore it is pleased to the honourable court to issue an
appropriate writ or in favour of petitioner and it is threefore prayer
that the court be pleased to direct the allotted college to admit the
petitioner without any delay.
 PRAYER

1] It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly
be pleased to:
2]Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction for admission formalities for
the Petitioner be completed at the Fergussion Medical College immediately .
3]That this Court be pleased to direct the Respondent to give admission to
the Petitioner and to comply with pool campus nomination list.
4]Any other relief and just the Hon’ble court may think fit on behalf of The
petitioner.

Place:
Date: / / 2024
________

Tripti Sanjay Jagtiani

Charudatt Nikam

Petitioner Advocate
 In the Supreme Court of India Memorandum of Petition
Civil Writ petition No. 364 of 2024

Fariha Hussain Shaikh ……..petitioner

V/s

UNION OF INDIA. …. Respondent

Argument from the Respondent side:

1] While the petitioner invokes Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, which

grants the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of
fundamental rights, it's important to note that this provision is not an
absolute right.

2] The Supreme Court has discretion in entertaining writ petitions under

Article 32 and typically intervenes only when there's a violation of
fundamental rights or a question of public importance. Admission to a
specific college, while significant to the petitioner, may not necessarily
constitute a violation of fundamental rights unless it's proven to be
discriminatory or arbitrary.

3] The admission process outlined by the Ministry of Health and Welfare was
followed in allocating seats for the MBBS/BDS course for the year 2023-
2024.

4] The petitioner was allocated a seat at Ferguson Medical College based on

this process.

5]The fact that other similarly nominated students were admitted to

different institutions does not necessarily imply discrimination.

6] Each institution may have its own selection criteria and limitations in
terms of available seats.
7] Petitioner was intentionally avoiding the admission procedure on time
dispite of issuing the petiotioner several mails and contacts petitioner were
late for admission on their own and did not reach for admission on time.
So the institution added other deserving student at the seat of the
petitioner, without considering the institution's admission policies and
availability of seats would be unjust to other deserving candidates who have
gone through the proper selection process .

8] The petitioner alleges discrimination on the basis of religion, stating that

being a Muslim, they were unfairly treated in the admission process.
However, there is no evidence provided to substantiate these claims.

9] Admission to educational institutions in India is typically based on merit

and reservation policies, not religion.
Without concrete evidence of discrimination, it's inappropriate to make such
allegations.

10] The petitioner requests immediate admission formalities at Fergussion

Medical College. However, granting such relief without considering the
institution's admission policies and availability of seats would be unjust to
other deserving candidates who have gone through the proper selection
process .

In conclusion, while the petitioner's grievances are acknowledged, it's

important to ensure that the court's intervention is based on sound legal
grounds and evidence of actual violation of fundamental rights. Without
clear evidence of discrimination or arbitrariness in the admission process,
granting the relief sought by the petitioner would set a dangerous precedent
and undermine the integrity of educational institutions' admission
procedures.
 PRAYER

1] The Writ Petition may please be dismissed.

2]Any other just and equitable relief may pleased be grant in favour of
respondent.

Place:
Date: / / 2024

____________________
Sanjay Kishor Jagtiani
Respondent Advocate