Delhi High Court Restores MBBS Admissions of Siblings of Deceased Naval Sailor: A Victory for Procedural Justice
In a landmark ruling that reaffirms the sanctity of natural justice and the binding nature of verified eligibility in educational admissions, the Delhi High Court, on 18 March 2024, quashed the cancellation of MBBS seats allotted to siblings Kumar Saurabh and Subhangi Priya under the Defence Priority III quota.
The case, W.P.(C) 12757/2023: Kumar Saurabh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., decided by Justice C. Hari Shankar, exposes the perils of administrative “rethinking” without due process and sets a robust precedent for students relying on official certifications.
The Tragic Catalyst: Death of a Sole Breadwinner
Kumar Shubham, a Sailor (Ex-EM (R) I, No. 257519-Y) in the Indian Navy, served from 9 August 2019 until his untimely death in harness on 16 September 2022. Unmarried and the family’s sole earning member, his demise—certified as attributable to naval service after a Board of Officers enquiry—left behind his mother, Smt. Neeraj Singh, and two younger siblings: Kumar Saurabh (brother) and Subhangi Priya (sister).
The family was declared “totally dependent” on him, with the mother later granted a special family pension of ₹18,000 per month plus dearness allowance from 9 June 2023.
Initial Documentation: A Foundation of Official Endorsements
Post-demise, the family secured critical certifications establishing the siblings’ status:
- Indian Navy Service Certificate (11 November 2022): Confirmed Shubham’s single status and initial dependent cards for the mother and Subhangi Priya.
- Dependent Identity Cards (DICES): Issued by Rajya/Zila Sainik Board, GNCTD—Kumar Saurabh’s on 16 March 2023 (valid until 2028); Subhangi Priya’s on 25 May 2023 (valid until 2025).
- Dependency Certificate (31 August 2023): From Naval Pension Office, Mumbai, affirming total family dependency on the deceased.
- Relationship Certificates (Proforma ‘C’, 22 May 2023): Explicitly for higher education admissions, certifying the siblings as “wards of armed forces personnel” under Priority III (“Widows/Wards of Defence personnel who died while in service with death attributable to military service”). A note clarified these were not dependent certificates, with dependency to be verified separately.
These documents aligned with the Ministry of Defence Circular (30 November 2017) and GGSIPU Prospectus, using the term “wards” broadly.
NEET UG 2023 and Admission Process: Verified and Countersigned
The siblings appeared for NEET UG 2023 (conducted 7 May 2023):
- Kumar Saurabh: All India Rank 318,969—allotted UR (Open Defence) seat at Dr. BSA Medical College & Hospital (BSAMCH).
- Subhangi Priya: All India Rank 863,641—allotted seat at NDMC Medical College (NDMCMC).
GGSIPU verified their claim as “legitimate” and “Defence Category Priority III.” Crucially, the Undertaking for Defence Category (Appendix 1) was countersigned on 25 May 2023 by the Secretary, Rajya Sainik Board (RSB), who certified: “I have checked the original documents and I certify that he/she is entitled for reservation under defence category under priority III (three).” The siblings commenced classes, marked “Reported” on the portal.
The Abrupt Cancellation: Triggered by a Single Email
On 13 September 2023, BSAMCH sought clarification from RSB. Brig. S.K. Narain responded the same day: “Kumar Saurabh Brother of Late Kumar Shubham is not eligible for admission… as ward of defence personnel.” GGSIPU cancelled both admissions via letter dated 19 September 2023, citing identical documents and Appendix 1 for Subhangi Priya. The letter offered no independent reasoning.
In affidavits:
- RSB (Brig. Narain): Claimed documents issued “inadvertently”; siblings excluded under pension-defined “dependents” (spouse/parents/unmarried children only).
- GGSIPU: Deferred to RSB; argued “wards” limited to children/widows per Prospectus Note 2(ii) to avoid “opening floodgates.”
High Court’s Four-Pronged Assault on the Cancellation
Justice Shankar quashed the letter on these grounds:
- Unreasoned Order (Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner): The letter relied solely on an unreasoned email; validity must stand on its own reasons, not later affidavits.
- Impermissible Volte Face (Rajendra Prasad Mathur v. Karnataka University; A. Sudha v. University of Mysore): RSB’s reversal after countersigning Appendix 1 was a “complete volte face.” Petitioners, innocent and factually transparent, could not be penalised for authorities’ “rethink.”
- Violation of Natural Justice: No notice or hearing before cancellation—a “flagrant” breach of audi alteram partem.
- Faulty Legal Premise: RSB conflated pension “dependents” with reservation “wards.” MoD Circular, Prospectus, and Appendix 1 use “wards”; reasoning was “faulty.”
Scope of ‘Wards’: Deliberately Unresolved, Yet Illuminated
The Court avoided defining “wards,” relegating it to a “more opportune occasion.” It rejected:
- GGSIPU’s claim that Note 2(ii) restricts “wards” to children/widows (merely a documentation rule).
- RSB’s “dependents” linkage.
Citing Charu Sharma v. Motilal Nehru College (cousin granted relief despite strict “sons/daughters” definition), the Court noted siblings were “vastly better situated” than a cousin, given dependency and no misrepresentation.
Conclusion and Relief: Full Restoration with Safeguards
The impugned letter was “quashed and set aside.” Petitioners entitled to:
- Readmission to respective MBBS courses.
- All consequential relief.
Applying actus curiae neminem gravabit (“Act of Court shall prejudice no one”), attendance shortages during litigation were excused; petitioners unrestricted from examinations.
Implications for Defence Quota Admissions
This judgment mandates:
- Reasoned decisions and natural justice in cancellations.
- Consistency in official certifications.
- Distinction between pension “dependents” and education “wards.”
It protects innocent students while leaving “wards” interpretation open, potentially broadening access for dependents of fallen personnel.
This article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For expert consultation on education law, defence quotas, or admission disputes, book a session with Legal Light Consulting – LLC, your trusted lawyers for all legal needs. Contact Vikas Pandey, Advocate, who successfully drafted the petition and secured this favourable order.
