Just about 10 days after a Single Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled out re-examination for PMET 2015, a Division Bench today made it clear that the admissions were not to be finalised for the time being.
Fixing September 17 as the next date of hearing, the Bench of Justice SS Saron and Justice Shekher Dhawan asserted: “In the meantime till the adjourned date, the counselling for admissions may continue. However, the admissions be not finalised by deposit of admission fee”.
The directions came on an appeal filed against the Single Bench verdict by Reetika and other candidates through a battery of lawyers, including Gurminder Singh, IPS. Kohli, RPS Bara, and MS Longia.
As the appeal came up for hearing, the counsel for the appellants contended that 26 questions out of 50 in physics were incorrect in the Punjab Pre-Medical Entrance Test conducted on May 17 by Baba Farid University of Health Sciences. Referring to other subjects, including chemistry and botany, it was contended that at least 40 out of 200 questions in four papers were incorrect.
The counsel added the inaccuracies caused grave prejudice to the rights of the appellants. Not one or two, but one-fifth of the total questions were wrong and each question carried four marks. The Court was further told that the counselling for the admissions was on. But admission had not been finalised.
Fixing September 17 as the next date of hearing, the Bench of Justice SS Saron and Justice Shekher Dhawan asserted: “In the meantime till the adjourned date, the counselling for admissions may continue. However, the admissions be not finalised by deposit of admission fee”.
The directions came on an appeal filed against the Single Bench verdict by Reetika and other candidates through a battery of lawyers, including Gurminder Singh, IPS. Kohli, RPS Bara, and MS Longia.
As the appeal came up for hearing, the counsel for the appellants contended that 26 questions out of 50 in physics were incorrect in the Punjab Pre-Medical Entrance Test conducted on May 17 by Baba Farid University of Health Sciences. Referring to other subjects, including chemistry and botany, it was contended that at least 40 out of 200 questions in four papers were incorrect.
The counsel added the inaccuracies caused grave prejudice to the rights of the appellants. Not one or two, but one-fifth of the total questions were wrong and each question carried four marks. The Court was further told that the counselling for the admissions was on. But admission had not been finalised.
