LPA 466/2023 Page 1 of 20 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 31 .07 .2025 Judgment pronounced on: 12 .09 .2025 + LPA 466/2023 & CM APL.4949/2025 SURAJM AL M EM ORIAL EDUCATION SOCIETY & ANR . ..... Appellants Through: M r. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate along with M r. Kumar Utkarsh, Adv. for A -1. M r. Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Senior Advocate along with M r. Kumar Utkarsh, Adv. for A-2. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS . ...Respondents Through: M r. Dhruv Rohatgi , Adv. for R - 1 & R -2. M s. Anita Sahani, Advocate for R-3. CORAM : HON'BLE M R. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE M R. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR J U D G M E N T ANIL KSHETARPAL , J. 1. The present Appeal assails the corectn ess of the Judgment GDWHG >KHUHLQDIWHU UHIH the Impugned Order ´@ passed by the learned Single Judge in W .P. (C) No. 14678/2022 and connected matters , whereby the admissions conducted by the Ap pellant ± M aharaja Surajmal Institute of T echnology [hereinafter refered to as ³06,7´ ] under the M anagement Quota for the academic session 2022 ±23 were held to be contrary to the applicable statutory LPA 466/2023 Page 2 of 20 provisions, namely, the Delhi Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fe e, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non -Exploitative Fee and Other M easures to Ensure Equity and Excellence) Act, 2007 >KHUHLQDIWHUUHIHUUHGWRD , as well as Delhi Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibition of capitation Fe, Regula tion of Admission, Fixation of the Non -exploitative Fee and other measures to ensure Equity & Excellence) Rules, 2007 >KHUHLQDIWHUUHIHUUHGWRDV³ the Rules ´@ , and the circulars issued by the Directorate of Higher Education, Government of NCT of Delhi [her HLQDIWHU UHIHUUHG WR DV ³*1&7'´@ , and Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University >KHUHLQDIWHU UHIHUUHG GGSIP 8QLYHUVLW\´@ . By the Impugned Order , while the admissions already granted were protected in the larger interest of students, a penalty was im posed whereby the M anagement Quota seats of M SIT were reduced WRµ1LO¶IRUWKHVXFFHHGLQJDFDGHPL ±24. FACTUAL M ATRIX 2. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, relevant facts in brief are required to be noticed . T he Appellant No. 1, Surajmal M emorial Education Society (Regd.), is a registered society engaged in imparting higher and professional education. Appellant No. 2, M SIT is a self -financing private institution established under the aegis of Appellant No. 1 , afil iated to GGSIP University, recognized under Section 2(f) of the UGC Act, and approved by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). 3. In terms of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder, 10% of the LPA 466/2023 Page 3 of 20 sanctioned intake in B.Tech. courses at M SIT was earmarked for admission under the M anagement Quota. For the Academic Session 2022 ±23, M SIT undertook the admission process for these seats. 4. On 22.09.2022, the Directorate of Higher Education, GNCTD , issued a circular directing the GGSIP University to create an online portal through which information regarding availability of seats and merit lists could be acesed by prospective applicants. Pursuant thereto, the GGSIP University issued further circulars dated 27.09.2022 and 14.10.2022 seking to ope rationalise the admission process through such portal. These circulars, as well as the admission procedure adopted by M SIT, became the subject matter of challenge in W .P.(C) No. 14678/2022 filed by M SIT along with three other institutions. 5. Around the sa me time, a separate writ petition, W .P.(C) No. 11906/2022, was filed by one student, Shubham Jha, who alleged non - transparency in the process of distribution of admission forms. By order dated 08.09.2022 , the learned Single Judge directed the concerned ins titutes to issue the requisite application form; that GLUHFWLRQZDVFRPSOLHGZLWKDQGW appeared in the relevant applicant lists and he was ultimately admitted during the admission cycle (the record shows his admission too k place in October 2022) . 6. Prior to the above circulars, M SIT on 16.09.2022 had published a list of 69 applicants who had applied for admission under the M anagement Quota. Thereafter, M SIT conducted counselling betwen LPA 466/2023 Page 4 of 20 27.10.2022 and 2 9.10.202, and subs equently admitted 62 students . 7. On 17.10.2022, in the writ procedings , the learned Single Judge recorded a prima facie view about the impugned circulars and directed the GGSIP University to ascertain the factual position regarding the admission processe s then underway. M eanwhile, the GGSIP University issued further notifications on 18.10.2022 and 02.11.2022, publishing consolidated lists of applicants for M anagement Quota seats and requiring institutions to conduct counselling acordingly. By 29.10.2022, M SIT had substantially completed its admissions under the M anagement Quota . 8. The foregoing sequence of these events, and the interplay between the statutory scheme under the Act and the Rules , the administrative directions issued by GNCTD, and the subse quent circulars of GGSIP University, formed the backdrop of the Impugned Order dated 17.05.2023 . PROCEDINGS BEFORE THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE 9. The writ petitions filed by M SIT and other institutions primarily questioned the validity of the circulars issue d by the Directorate of Higher Education , GNCTD and GGSIP University in September ± October 2022, contending that the same travelled beyond the statutory framework of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. It was urged that the directions requiring a centr alized portal and consolidated merit lists were issued at a stage when the admission process had already commenced, and that compliance therewith was neither feasible nor legally mandated. LPA 466/2023 Page 5 of 20 10. The learned Single Judge, upon considering the rival submission s and the material placed on record, held that the admission process followed by M SIT for the M anagement Quota seats during the academic session 2022 ±23 was contrary to the governing statutory provisions, the Act, the Rules framed thereunder, and the circu lars issued by GNCTD and the GGSIP University. At the same time, having regard to the fact that students had already ben admitted and were pursuing their courses, the admissions were not disturbed. 11. As a measure of penalty, however, the learned Single Judge upheld the decision of the GGSIP University to reduce the M anagement Quota seats of M SIT to Nil for the suceding academic session 2023 ±24. It is this direction, along with the findings leading thereto, which forms the subject matter of challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal . CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELANT S 12. Learned counsel for the Appellant contend ed that the issue regarding the validity and applicability of the GNCTD Circular dated 22.09.2022 and the subsequent notifications issued by the GGSIP University for the academic session 2022 -23 already stands settled by this Court . Reliance was placed on the order dated 04.08.20 23 passed in LPA No. 563/2023 titled Vivekanand Professional Institution of Professional Institute vs Government of NCT o f Delhi , wherein it was held that the authority had no jurisdiction to issue such directions . Further reliance was placed on LPA No. 482/2023 titled as Noorakshi Dahiya vs GGSIPU , decided on 31.08.2023, wherein the Circulars LPA 466/2023 Page 6 of 20 dated 22.09.2022, 27.09.2022 an d 14.10.2022 were held to be ultra vires Articles 14 and 19(g) of the Constitution of India , as well as violative of provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder . 13. It was urged that once the admissions process has commenced, the governing rules for the admissions cannot be altered midway. The commencement of process is traceable to the date of publication of the brochure of GGSIP University for the academic session 2022 -23, which set out the procedure for admission, including under the M anagemen t Quota . As per the brochure guidelines contained therein, the Appellant issued an advertisement on 26.08.2022 in the newspaper for filling the management quota. Pursuant thereto, 69 students who had applied were enlisted, and the said list was published a t the website of the institute along with the marks obtained by them in the qualifying examination. Subsequently, the list was frozen on 16.09.2022, i.e. , much before the issuance of circulars dated 22.09.2022 and 27.09.2022 , whereby the process for admiss ion to the Management Qu ota was sought to be modified . 14. It was further contended that the Appellant s did not indulge in any unfair practice s or procedures to deprive any meritorious candidate from applying for the Management Qu ota . Except for a condonab le delay of a few days under Section 4(14) of the Act attributable to court procedings and the delay in creation of the *RYHUQPHQW¶V SRUWDO QR YLRODWLRQ ocured . Though the merit list publication was delayed owing to subsequen t circulars dated 22.09.2022 and 27.09.2022, no prejudice was caused , as the list had already ben published within time, and no LPA 466/2023 Page 7 of 20 complaint was received . Registration under the Directorate of Higher Education, GNCTD Circular dated 22.09.2022 and GGSIP Unive rsity Circular dated 27.09.2022 began on 18.10.2022, yet the course - and institute -specific lists directed by the government were never provided . Consequently, the Appellant s proceded with its counselling schedule submitted on 07.10.2022 and as permitted E\ WKH &RXUW order dated 16.09.2022. Acordingly, first -round counselling was held on 27.10.2022 with prior intimation to the GGSIP University, followed by second -round counselling on 28 ±29.10.2022, both conducted in a fre, fair, and transparent manner, with all admissions duly intimated to the GGSIP University, which also acepted the prescribed share of fees at Rs. 20,000 per student. 15. Learned counsel next argued that no punishment is prescribed under the Act or the Rules framed thereunder, and ther efore the direction reducing 10% of the M anagement Quota seats of the Appellant Institution for the academic session 2023 -24 to nil is beyond the scope of judicial review. Rel iance was placed on the case of M .S. Ahlawat vs. State of Haryana 1, wherein it wa s held that the Court cannot impose a punishment which is not provided under the Statute. Another limb of argument is that the punishment is imposed on the prospective students rather than in on the Institute, as the same takes away the rights of the prosp ective students who will be applying a year later i.e. , 2023 -24, and who may be entitled to gain admission in M Q on the basis of high score in CBSE examination without any opportunity of being heard and for no fault of theirs. 1 (20) 1 SCC 278 LPA 466/2023 Page 8 of 20 16. Lastly, it was submitted that the Appellants had complied with all interim orders passed by the Court, including those dated 08.09.2022, 16.09.2022, 28.09.2022, 17.10.2022 and 20.10.2022 , and that no instance of defiance or disregard can be attributed to them . CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT NOS. 1 & 2 17. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submitted that the Circular dated 22.09.202 was issued by the Directorate of Higher Education, GNCTD , with the prior approval of the then Hon'ble M inister of Higher Education/ D eputy Chi ef M inister of Delhi . The object of the said Circular was to introduce transparency, clarity and eficiency in the admissions against M anagement Quota seats in private institutions afiliated with GGSIP University , in conformity with the Act and the Rules. 18. It was further submitted that by Order dated 05.05.2011, GGSIP University was appointed as the Designated Agency for conducting admissions and counselling in the self -financing Institutions affiliated to it. Acord ingly, Respondent No. 2/Directorate of Higher Education , GNCTD has limited role once the designated authority is appointed, and therefore the answering respondents are not in a position to comment upon the manner in which the admission process was undertaken by the Appellants. CONTENTIONS OF T HE RESPONDENT NO. 3 19. Lea rned counsel for Respondent No. 3/GGSIP University supported the Impugned Order and submitted that the Appellants had LPA 466/2023 Page 9 of 20 clearly flouted the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder, as noted in detail by the learned Sin gle Judge. It was argued that despite repeated directions, the Appellants chose to follow their own admission schedule and procedure, thereby undermining the uniformity and transparency sought to be achieved through the Circulars issued by Directorate of H igher Education , GNCTD and the GGSIP University. 20. It was further contended that once the Directorate of Higher Education , GNCTD had mandated creation of an online portal, the GGSIP University was bound to operationalise the same in the larger public int erest, so that all applicants had equal access to information. Consolidated merit lists were acordingly published, but the Appellants disregarded these and proceded with counselling on their own terms, thereby creating scope for arbitrariness and exclusi on of meritorious candidates. 21. Counsel for the GGSIP University emphasised that the penalty imposed ² reducing the M anagement Quota seats of M SIT to nil for the academic session 2023 ±24 ² is a corrective measure intended to ensure compliance in future a nd to deter other afiliated institutions from adopting similar practices. It was submitted that the punishment is not arbitrary, as it directly addresses the nature of the violation, and is proportionate to the gravity of non -compliance. FINDINGS & ANALYS IS 22. After considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material placed on record , the LPA 466/2023 Page 10 of 20 issue that survives for determination is confined to the corectness of the direction contained in Para graph No. 183 of the Impugned Order, whereby the learned Single Judge, instead of cancelling the admissions made in the Academic Session 2022 ±23 , imposed the penalty of reducing the M anagement Quota seats of the Appellant ± M SIT to nil for the suceeding Academic Session 2023 ±24. Para graph 183 thereof reads as under: ³183. Hence, instead of treating the admisions made in the Academic Sesion 202 -2023 as nul and void, the 10% M anagement Quota Seats of the M SIT for the Academic Sesion 2023 -2024 stands reduced to Nil, mea ning thereby that the 10% M anagement Quota Seats shall be filed up by the designated authority as per the procedure to be followed for filling up the remaining 90% seats for the Academic Sesion 2023 -2024. Any advertisement, already isued by M SIT, for ad miting students against the 10% M anagement Quota Seats stands canceled. ´ 23. The l earned Single Judge held that the Appellant s failed to ensure transparency and compliance with the procedure mandated under the Act and the Rules, and the applicable circul ars. The Court noted that the window provided by M SIT for applications was narower than the minimum time contemplated under Rule 8 of the Rules , and that the Appellants proceded with counselling despite the subsistence of various interim directions dated 08.09.2022, 16.09.2022, 17.10.2022 and 20.10.2022. 24. From the record, i t is evident that the Appellants conducted admissions in October 2022 without aligning their process with the consolidated lists and online portal framework introduced by the GGSIP University pursuant to the circulars dated 22.09.2022 and 27.09.2022. The learned Single Judge, in para graph s 144 ±145 of the LPA 466/2023 Page 11 of 20 ,PSXJQHG 2UGHU VSHFLILFDOO\ UHFRU dated 26.08.2022 allowed barely two weks for submission of applica tion forms, contrary to the statutory mandate of granting a minimum of 18 days under Rule 8(2)(a) , thereby undermining equal opportunity to prospective candidates. 25. Paragraph Nos. 144 ±145 of the Impugned Order read as under: ³14. The fourth question i s regarding the admission made by M SIT for the Academic Sesion 202 -2023 against the M anagement Quota of 10% seats. $FFRUGLQJWR06,7µVRZQVWDQGLW dated LQ D µ'DLO\ (QJOLVK¶ QHZVS Daily Hindi ¶ newspape r. The last date for submision of aplication was prescribed to be 12.09.202. The advertisement expresed that the aplication forms were available in the ofice of the institute upto 29.08.202. The advertisement published in µThe Statesman ¶ dated 26.08 .202 i.e., the English Daily reads as under: - ³$'0,66,21127,&()250$1$*(0(17482 SEATS In terms of Directorate of Higher Education/Govt. of NCT of | Delhi Notifications regarding filling up of 10% M anagement Quota Seats, aplications are invited in th e form available in the ofices of the Institutes upto 29.08.202 between 10.0 a.m. to 1.0 p.m. The last date for submision of aplication will be 12.09.202 upto 1.0 p.m. The Counseling will take place in the premises of the Institutes on a date and t ime to be notified on the Institutes website with respect to the folowing courses: M aharaja Surajmal Institute.: %%$*HQ%%$% ,%&$%&RP ± 1st and 2nd Shifts, B.Ed., M BA, BA -LLB and BA -LLB M aharaja Surajmal Institute of Technology: %7H ch. (IT), (CSE), (ECE) ± 1st and 2nd Shift, B. Tech. (EE) - VW6KLIWDQG%7HFK/DWHUDO( ´ 26. During the pendency of the present Ap peal, an application filed by the Appellants was disposed of on 14.06.2023 whereby this Court LPA 466/2023 Page 12 of 20 permitted the Appell ant s to fill the M anagement Quota seats for Academic Session 2023 ±24, subject to the condition that in the event of dismissal of the appeal, such quota would stand forfeited for the subsequent year. The GGSIP University has acordingly not permitted M SIT t o exercise the M anagement Quota for the 2024 ±25 session. The said order dated 14.06.2023 reads as under : ³1. This is an aplication seeking direction to the respondents not to include 10% management quota seats in the counseling for 90% general seats and alow the apelant to conduct the admision proces against those management quota seats. 2. Isue notice. M s. Sahani, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 accepts notice and oposes the aplication. 3. M r. Tripathi, learned standing counsel has no object ion to the prayers made in the aplication. 4. M r. M ittal, learned senior counsel states that he may be permited to fil the 10% management quota seats for this academic sesion and in case the LPA is disalowed, he will forgo his 10% management seats for the subsequent academic year. He shall file an afidavit to this efect. 5. Our atention has been drawn to para 29 of the impugned order which reads as under: "29. During the course of argument, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent -NCT of Delhi takes a categorical stand that the Circular dated 2.09.202 is prospective in nature and, therefore, in Clause (i) of the Circular the word 'prospective' has been consciously mentioned. He also takes the categorical stand that the Circular would be made aplic able once the University creates a portal. According to him, no portal has been created by the University for the Academic Sesion 202 -2023. He further submits that the University has deviated from the Circular dated 2.09.202 while isuing the folow up Circular dated 27.09.202. According to him, no registrations were intended to be done at the University level." 6. A perusal of the order shows that prima facie the circular was not aplicable to the apelant, pursuant to which the apelant has been pe nalised. Hence, it is directed that the apelant shall be permited to fil the 10% management quota seats for this academic sesion and in LPA 466/2023 Page 13 of 20 case the LPA is disallowed, he will forgo his 10% management seats for the subsequent academic year. 7. Respondent No. 3 is at liberty to file an aplication seeking modification of the order before the Roster bench. 8. List on 03.07.2023 before Roster bench for clarification/modification of the order, if so required. ´ 27. On 07.07.2025, an interim order was passed res training the diversion of M anagement Quota seats to the General Quota until further directions. The same reads as under : ³/LVWWKHPDWWHUIRUKHDULQJRQ 2. The M anagement Quota seats shall not be diverted to the General Quota sea ts till the next date of hearing. 7KHGDWHRIVWDQGVFDQF 28. It may be noted that the Appellants placed reliance on the Division Bench judgment dated 04.08.2023 in LPA No. 563/2023 captioned Vivekanand Professional Institute v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi , wherein the Court observed that the order dated 22.09.2022 issued by the Directorate of Higher Education, GNCTD had not been shown to have been issued by a competent authority and that, consequently, any action taken pursuant thereto woul d be without jurisdiction. Reliance was also placed on the decision dated 31.08.2023 in LPA No. 482/2023 captioned Noorakshi Dahiya v. GGSIP University , where the Division Bench reiterated the view that the circulars dated 22.09.2022, 27.09.2022, and 14.10 .2022 could not be pressed into service so as to defeat admissions that had already commenced. 29 . However, these observations cannot advance the case of the present Appellants, inasmuch as the GGSIP University itself, by a LPA 466/2023 Page 14 of 20 contemporaneous circular dated 2 2.09.2022, reiterated and adopted the impugned directions, and the subsequent Division Bench rulings have also emphasized the necessity of ensuring transparency in the management quota admissions by requiring compliance with the procedure under the Act and Rule s. 30. Although this Court entertains some reservations regarding the corectness of the finding of the learned Single Judge as to the competence of the Director to issue the circular dated 22.09.2022, the issue has since ben rendered academic . This is because the GGSIP University, by a subsequent circular of the same date (Annexure P -9), reiterated those directions, which stand upheld in LPA Nos. 563 and 482 of 2023. 31. Further, with effect from 13.04.2023, an Admission Regulatory Committe has ben duly constituted. By virtue of the creation of this statutory body, the Committe contemplated under the circular dated 22.09.2022 stands subsumed and no longer retains present relevance . 32. 7KH$SSHOODQWV¶DUJXPHQWWKDWWK admission process mid -VHVVLRQDQGWKDW³WKHUX EH FKDQJHG PLGZD\´ GRHV QRW SHUVX principle is well -settled, it cannot be invoked to justify non - compliance with statutory rules and binding judicial direct ions. The record discloses that the Appellants not only curtailed the minimum period prescribed under Rule 8(2) (a) of the Rules , but also proceded with counselling in disregard of subsisting interim orders of this Court. The contention that no unfair prac tice has ben established, and LPA 466/2023 Page 15 of 20 that no punishment is prescribed in the Act or the Rules, is equally untenable. 33. On the contrary, learned counsel for the Respondent s, has ULJKWO\ SRLQWHG RXW 5XOH D notice, which was admittedly not complied with. Further, Rule 8 stipulates that all admissions to the Management Quota shall remain provisional, subject to ratification by the designated agency. The $SSHOODQWV¶XQLODWHUDOSURFHVVFR provis ions, cannot be countenanced . Rule 8 is extracted as under: ³8. Alotment of seats . - (1) Alotment of seats in an un -aided profesional colege or institution shall be made colege or institution - wise for each course. (2) Every institution other than a m inority institution, shall provide for seats in respect of management quota, wards of defence personel, persons with disability and others in the maner as described below :- (a) M anagement Quota. - (i) The Chairman or Secretary of the highest management b ody of the institution shall furnish an afidavit to the designated agency, mentioning therein that they have followed the procedure laid down in the Act and these rules in a transparent maner and that they have done so without any prejudice or undue favo ur. Such an afidavit shall accompany the list of sucesful candidates under management quota, to be lodged with the University in the maner laid down in sub -clause (vii). (i) The institution shall advertise the admision notice for management quota s eats in at least two leading daily newspapers, one in Hindi and the other in English in adition to displaying the same on WKHLQVWLWXWLRQ¶VZHEVLWHDQGWKHLQV conspicuous place. The admision notice shall be displayed at least a fortnight before the last date for closing of admision for the concerned course in the University and shall include therein information necesary for the students seeking admision to management quota seats. The admision notice shal include the rein the place from which admision forms will be available, the date, time and maner for submision of completed applications and the schedule for various admision proceses and counseling. Prospective aplicants shall be given a period of at least eig hten LPA 466/2023 Page 16 of 20 days to aply for seats under the management quota, in the aforementioned maner. (ii) W hile calculating the management seats, fraction les than 0.7 shall be ignored and above that converted into one full seat. (iv) Based on the agregate marks o btained by qualified aplicants at the qualifying examination, the institution concerned shall prepare and display the rank ordered merit list of such aplicants on the LQVWLWXWLRQ¶VZHEVLWHDQGQRWLFHERDUG the institution, within two days of the closing date for receipt of the management quota aplications. The criteria for rank ordering of DSSOLFDQWVZLWKDWLHLQWKHTXDOLI\LQ shall be the same as those laid down in the admision brochure or as laid down by the designated authority. (v) Based on the merit list so drawn up, the institution concerned shall conduct admision counseling for alotment of branches/courses to qualified aplicants within a period of thre days of drawing up of the me rit list of qualified management quota aplicants. Such admision counseling will, however, be subject to the condition that there shall not be more than two rounds of counseling. The list of aplicants who will be caled for a given round of admision cou nseling shall be GLVSOD\HG RQ WKH LQVWLWXWLRQ¶V ZHEVLW conspicuous place. (vi) Folowing the conduct of admision counseling, the list of aplicants admited to the management quota seats made on the basis of the merit list dr awn up in the aforementioned maner and the balance of the management quota seats in each course shall be published at the end of each round of counseling on the website of the institution as wel as that of the designated agency. A copy of such list shall be displayed on the notice board of the designated agency as wel as that of the institution, kept at a conspicuous place for the information of the candidates and others. The list of the candidates being caled for the first round of counseling shall be displayed in the aforementioned maner along with the merit list, indicating therein the date, time and place at which the counseling will be held. The date, time and place of the second round of counseling will be displayed along with the list of candidat es admited in the first round of counseling: Provided that the second round of counseling shal comence only twelve hours after publication of the list of aplicants admited in the first round of counseling and the discipline/course -wise balance of sea ts. (vi) The last date to fil up the management quota seats will be nine calendar days after the last date for regular admisions in the University and the concerned course LPA 466/2023 Page 17 of 20 (vii) Al admisions made to the management quota seats shall be provisional an d will need ratification by the designated agency, which will convey its decision within a day of being informed by the institution of the list of sucesful candidates and the basis of their selection as per procedure mentioned herein before. (ix) The af iliated institutions shall not be authorized to admit candidates against the management quota seats after the cut -of date fixed as mentioned in sub -clause (vi) above.