$~91 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010416272026 + W.P.(C) 12869/2026 DEVYANI MEENA .....Petitioner Through: Appearance not given versus DELHI TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sandeep Garg, Mr. Shobhit Gupta, Mr. Jatin, Mr. Lakshay Goel, Advs. for R1 Adv Sanjay Vashishtha, Adv Siddhartha Goswami, Adv Aditya Sachdeva CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 28.09.2026 1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:- “a. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of Certiorari, quashing and setting aside the Final Cancellation Notice dated 11.08.2026 issued by Respondent No.1, insofar as it cancels the admission of the Petitioner to the B.Tech. (Computer Science & Engineering) programme at Delhi Technological University on account of non-payment of the balance academic fee; b. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2026 at 13:24:12 particularly in the nature of Mandamus, directing Respondent No.1 to restore/reinstate the admission of the Petitioner to the B.Tech. (Computer Science & Engineering) programme for the academic session 2026- 27 and permit the Petitioner to continue her course of study; c. Direct Respondent No.1 to permit the Petitioner to deposit the entire outstanding balance academic fee of Rs. 1,74,700/-, or such amount as may be determined by Respondent No.1 in accordance with the applicable fee structure, together with such reasonable late fee/charges, if any, as this Hon'ble Court may deem appropriate; d. Direct the Respondents to treat the Petitioner's admission as continuing from the date of her original admission, and to permit her to attend classes, participate in academic activities, undertake examinations and complete all consequential academic and administrative formalities without being prejudiced by the impugned cancellation;...” 2. The petition was heard and allowed by this Court vide Order dated 03.07.2026. 3. Pursuant to which, an LPA bearing No. 756/2026 was preferred against the aforesaid Order wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench has set aside the same and directed this Court to hear the matter afresh. Accordingly, the parties have been heard afresh. 4. The petitioner was allotted admission to B.Tech. (Computer Science This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2026 at 13:24:12 and Engineering) at the respondent No. 1 University through Joint Admission Counselling for the Academic Session 2026-2027 under the ST Category. 5. The petitioner paid the requisite amount of Rs. 95,000/- towards seat acceptance and also appeared for physical documents verification on 17.06.2026. 6. The admission of the petitioner was cancelled on 11.08.2026 due to non-payment of balance academic fee to tune of Rs. 1,74,700/-. 7. This Court in paragraph Nos. 8, 9 and 10 of its Order dated 03.09.2026 observed as under:- “8. I am of the view that in the present case, the petitioner has secured admission on her own merit and has not only got selected for the seat but also has started her academic course in the respondent University. At this juncture, the cancellation of admission of the petitioner only on account of non-deposit of balance academic fee is a disproportionate action, especially when there is no fault attributable to the petitioner and it was only a result of an inadvertent error. In case the seat is cancelled for the said reason, the action would be punitive and irreparable loss and injury would be caused to the petitioner. 9. In this view of the matter, the admission of the petitioner should be restored. The petitioner is hereby cautioned to be prompt from now. 10. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2026 at 13:24:12 petitioner is granted one week to deposit Rs. 1,74,700/-, with the respondent University and the impugned cancellation notice dated 11.08.2026 is hereby set aside and the admission of the petitioner stands restored.” 8. In LPA preferred by the respondent No. 1 University, the Hon’ble Division Bench in its Order dated 21.09.2026 has made the following observations:- “6. Had it been a simple case of cancellation of admission on the ground of non-deposit of academic fee, we would have, in all likelihood, endorsed the view taken by the learned Single Judge, however, certain intervening developments which took place after cancellation of admission of the respondent, vide notice dated 11.08.2026, persuade us to take a view other than the one taken by the learned Single Judge. 7. After issuance of the notice dated 11.08.2026 whereby the admission of the respondent was cancelled, spot round counselling took place and the seat against which the respondent was pursuing her course was allotted to another candidate pursuant to which he might have taken admission and, therefore, as a result of the impugned order dated 03.09.2026 if the respondent is offered admission, that will impact the admission of the student who was admitted on the basis of spot round cancelling. 8. Accordingly, having regard to the impact of the impugned order dated 03.09.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge, This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2026 at 13:24:12 we are unable to find ourselves in agreement with the directions issued therein. 9. At this juncture, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that, in fact, proper notices were not issued by the appellant-University asking for making deposit of the academic fee; neither they were served either on the respondent or upon her parents/father and further that the respondent belongs to the reserved category of scheduled tribe and it is not that she or her family members were not in a position to make deposit of the fee rather the fee could not be deposited on account of the fact that proper information/notice could not be received; neither any such notice was served upon the respondent or his father appropriately. 10. The said facts, however, are being denied by learned counsel for the appellant. 11. Be that as it may, since the appellant university was deprived of its opportunity of putting forth its case by filing of counter affidavit to the averments made in the writ petition before the learned Single Judge, no finding on what is being urged before us by learned counsel representing the respondent can be given by us. 12. For the aforesaid reasons, we set aside the order dated 03.09.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge and allow the appeal. 13. The proceedings of W.P.( C) 12869/2026 are revived This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2026 at 13:24:12 and the petition is restored to its original number. The writ petition be, thus, accordingly, listed before the learned Single Judge.” 9. As per the reply cum counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No.1 University, the petitioner was informed regarding the payment of balance fee on 24.07.2026, via email dated 03.08.2026, 05.08.2026 and also 07.08.2026. Since these were bulk emails, the possibility of the same being landed in the spam folder of the petitioner’s email cannot be denied. 10. However, paragraph No. 10 of the reply cum counter-affidavit reads as under:- “10.That after cancellation of the admission of petitioner and other students by notices dt. 11.08.2026, approximately 118, are in numbers, did not showed their interest in depositing the balance fees so as per the process, rule, and regulations, then in the automatic upgradation of the seats or the new seats in the spot rounds (on 24.08.2026 & 25.08.2026) were fulfilled by eligible student. Now no vacancy or seat is available to accommodate any student in any manner especially in the branch so opt by the petitioner. It is- submitted, entire information regarding the admission process or availability of seats is present on the portal of Joint Admission Committee (JAC) Delhi and respondent no. 1. It is submitted as per the rules. No seat can be kept vacant after the cancellation of admission of the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2026 at 13:24:12 concerned student, and immediately either the upgradation of the branch or the fulfilment of admission took place automatically. The Petitioner, therefore, cannot contend that the reminder to deposit balance péyment was communicated only through a single isolated communication Information of JAC is annexed as ANNEXURE -B (COLLY)” 11. The paragraph No. 10 of the reply cum counter-affidavit states that 118 students were similarly situated as the petitioner and on account of non-deposit of the balance fee, there was automatic upgradation of those seats as well as new seats to the spot round of counselling. 12. Hence, even if I were to agree with the contentions of the petitioner and create a supernumerary seat, the same course of action would have to be followed for substantial number of candidates who are similarly situated as the petitioner and cannot be denied relief in identical set of circumstances. 13. This Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction even though has sympathy with the petitioner but cannot direct creation of the supernumerary seat in view of the aforesaid peculiar facts. 14. However, since the petitioner has not been given admission, the fee deposited by the petitioner shall be refunded within 2 weeks from uploading of the order. 15. The petition is dismissed in the aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2026 / (MS) This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2026 at 13:24:12