HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 27532 of 2025 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Petitioner took National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) (UG)- 2025. His grievance is discrimination. While other States do not allow candidates/students with domicile elsewhere for counseling in respect of government nor private colleges, in Uttar Pradesh (UP) counseling for private colleges is open to all. Petitioner is domicile in the State. Another grievance of petitioner is, discrepancy in counseling fees/charges for government and private colleges. At stage of counseling, there cannot be this discrepancy, of lower and higher fees. 2. Mr. P.K. Singh, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner. Mr. Sharad Chandra Upadhyay, learned advocate, Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State and Ms. Akansha Sharma, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent no. 2 (the Director). 3. The writ petition was moved on 29th August, 2025. Attention was drawn to order dated 6th August, 2025 of the first Division Bench refusing the petition as public interest litigation (PIL). Hence, fresh writ petition was filed and it has come up for hearing and disposal. 4. Today Mr. Upadhyay files affidavit dated 17th September, 2025, in opposition to the petition. He relies, inter alia, on paragraph-6 to submit, there stands made Government Order (GO) dated 18th June, 2025 providing guidelines for conducting counseling in UP, in respect of candidates, who took NEET (UG)-2025. Clear provision is there for Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pradeep Kumar Singh, Rakesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Kartikey Tripathi .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) domiciles to attend counseling for admission to government colleges. This condition stands relaxed in case of private colleges but there are requirements to file domicile certificate providing for candidates' domicile in the State but having obtained education elsewhere as also candidates having domicile elsewhere, who have obtained their education in the State. The GO has not been challenged. Petitioner's application dated 3rd July, 2025 stands rejected on a reasoned order. That order has not been challenged. As such, submission made from the Bar on discrimination cannot invite interference, while the admission process is nearing final stage. He opposes the writ petition. 5. In reply Mr. Singh files supplementary affidavit also dated 17th September, 2025 incorporating challenge to order dated 9th September, 2025, rejecting his client's application dated 3rd July, 2025. He submits, the order, immediately upon having been available, his client has brought on record to include it as an order under challenge. 6. We shall come to order dated 9th September, 2025 later. Relevant prayers in the petition are reproduced below. "i). To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to take a decision on the application which is moved on 03.07.2025 in the interest of the students of the State (annexed as Annexure No. 2 to this writ petition). ii). To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to amend in eligibility criteria for admission in aforesaid Private Medical Colleges accordance with the eligibility criteria fixed for Government Medical College of the State, otherwise the ends of justice shall be mitigated. iii). To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to stay the counseling process of the State in respect of admission in MBBS as well as BDS in Private Medical Colleges of the State till the formulation of common and uniform eligibility criteria. iv). To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, WRIC No. 27532 of 2025 2 directing the respondents to conduct the first 02 round counseling of UG Medical course by providing the preference to the student of the State as provided in State of M.P., Rajasthan, Haryana, Punjab, Maharashtra etc." Petitioner wants admission pursuant to him having sat for NEET (UG)- 2025. He had made application dated 3rd July, 2025, after issuance of GO dated 18th June, 2025. In effect his grievance is against provisions in the GO but it has not been impugned in the petition. 7. Notwithstanding aforesaid in last preceding paragraph, we find petitioner's claim to invite interference of Court is to restrict those candidates, who have domicile in the State but have obtained education elsewhere or have obtained education here, having domicile elsewhere, from seeking admission in private colleges of the State. It is not necessary for us to enquire and ascertain veracity of petitioner's allegation that other States do not similarly permit, in case of private colleges situate therein. What is important is, petitioner seeks restriction of competition in respect of the admission process to private colleges. We are not inclined to interfere on basis of. It follows that we will not interfere with rejection order dated 9th September, 2025 as it is based on said GO dated 18th June, 2025. Participation of petitioner in counseling will depend on evaluation of his merit against the competition. So far as discrepancy in counseling fees are concerned, we need not comment as there is no prayer. 8. For reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is found to be without merit and it is accordingly dismissed. September 18, 2025 Shiraz WRIC No. 27532 of 2025 3 (Arindam Sinha,J.) (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIRAZ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad