logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 2529 print Preview print print
Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : W.P.(MD). Nos. 27984 & 26550 of 2025 & W.M.P.(MD). Nos. 21731, 20592, 20597, 28640 & 28709 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
Parties : Immanuel Arasar International Institute of Science & Technology Educational & Charitable Trust, Rep. by Managing Trustee, Kanyakumari Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare, Chennai & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Isaac Mohanlal, Senior Counsel, M/s. Isaac Chambers, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1 to R3, N. Ramesh Arumugam, Government Advocate, R4, A.S. Vaigunth, Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 01-04-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to allow the petitioner's college to admit students in BYNS course for the academic year 2025-2026 to its full admission capacity (100 seats) as permitted under the Affiliation order in Proc No. Affln.VII(1)/37348/ 2022 dated 30.11.2024 issued by the 4th respondent University through the counselling conducted by the 3rd respondent Selection committee and in such other manner in accordance with law in the forthcoming counselling on 08.10.2025 or in any other future date/dates.

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent Commissionerate of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy in Ref.No.1250/Sel.Comm/2025 dated 16.09.2025 quash the same. In both writ petitions)

Common Order

W.P(MD)No.26550/2025

1. The petitioner challenges the proceedings dated 16.09.2025 issued by the second respondent, whereby the intake of seats for admission to the Bachelor of Naturopathy and Yogic Sciences (BNYS) course for the academic year 2025–2026 was reduced from 100 to 61 seats. The approved intake for the petitioner’s institution is 100 seats.

2. For the academic year 2024–2025, admissions to the said course were to be filled through counselling conducted by the third respondent. However, only 61 candidates were sponsored under both the State and Management quotas, leaving 39 seats unfilled. The petitioner institution, treating them as lapsed seats, filled up the said 39 seats under the Management quota.

3. Subsequently, the respondent University directed the petitioner to discharge the said 39 students, which led to the filing of W.P.(MD)No.16507 of 2025. By order dated 03.12.2025, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court set aside the said direction and directed the respondents to regularise the admissions of all 39 students admitted under the lapsed category. The said order has attained finality and has been implemented by the respondent University, and the students were permitted to continue their studies and appear for examinations.

4. Heard Mr. Isaac Mohalal, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. N. Ramesh Arumuga, learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 to 3, and Mr. A.S. Vaigunth, learned counsel for the fourth respondent, and perused the materials available on record.

5. The second respondent, in the counter affidavit, states that the intake was reduced from 100 to 61 seats based on instructions from the respondent University, on the ground that the petitioner had admitted 39 students who were not sponsored by the Selection Committee. However, in view of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.16507 of 2025 dated 03.12.2025, directing regularisation of the said 39 students, and the subsequent approval granted by the respondent University, the very basis of the impugned order no longer survives. The impugned order had also been stayed by this Court on 24.09.2025 and the same continues to be in force.

6. The fourth respondent University, in its counter affidavit in W.P.(MD)No.27984 of 2025, has stated that the seat matrix for the BNYS course in the petitioner’s institution has been revised from 61 to 100 seats and the same has been communicated to the second and third respondents.

7. In W.P.(MD)No.27984 of 2025, the petitioner seeks a direction to permit the institution to admit students to the BNYS course for the academic year 2025–2026 to the full sanctioned strength of 100 seats.

8. In view of the fact that (i) the admission of the 39 students has been regularised pursuant to the orders of this Court, and (ii) the respondent University itself has revised the seat matrix from 61 to 100 seats, the impugned proceedings dated 16.09.2025 are unsustainable in law.

9. Accordingly, W.P.(MD)No.26550 of 2025 is allowed and the impugned proceedings dated 16.09.2025 issued by the second respondent are quashed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

10. Insofar as W.P.(MD)No.27984 of 2025 is concerned, in view of the revision of the seat matrix from 61 to 100 seats by the respondent University, nothing survives for adjudication. Accordingly, the said writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal