The Delhi High Court, on November 3, declined to intervene in the ongoing LLB admissions dispute raised by a candidate seeking another round of counselling at the University of Delhi (DU). The division bench emphasized that admission cycles cannot be reopened repeatedly, even if some seats remain vacant, as it would create an “incongruous and never-ending situation”.
Background
The appellant, Neha Malav, an OBC category candidate, scored 151 marks in the CUET-PG entrance for DU’s LLB programme. In the fourth and final spot round of counselling, the cut-off for the OBC category stood at 155 marks-just four marks above her score.
Read also: Kerala High Court orders immediate clean-up and shampoo sachet ban at Erumeli to protect
She alleged that after Spot Round IV, DU still had around 98 unfilled seats across Unreserved and OBC categories. She claimed the university did not disclose the vacancy status and that withholding such information prevented eligible candidates like her from being considered.
Her writ petition before a single judge had been dismissed, prompting her to file the present appeal before the division bench.
Court’s Observations
A division bench comprising the Chief Justice and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela heard the matter. The appellant’s counsel argued that since she had filed the petition on October 4-just days after admission closure-her plea should not be dismissed on technical timing grounds. He suggested that the Court apply the “Doctrine of Relation Back” so the petition could be treated as filed before closure.
On the other hand, DU’s counsel stated that reopening admissions at this stage would disrupt the academic calendar. He stressed that the appellant was below the cut-off in the last counselling round, and allowing her request would open the gates for many others who narrowly missed admission.
The bench seemed concerned about the larger systemic implications.
“The bench observed, ‘If we direct a fresh round today, another candidate tomorrow may seek yet another. This cycle would never end.’”
Referring to earlier decisions, including the Supreme Court’s ruling in Neelu Arora vs Union of India, the Court recalled that unfilled seats alone cannot justify restarting the counselling process. It also cited its own recent judgment in Sumit Kumar Singh vs University of Delhi, where the Court had already discouraged post-closure interventions in admission cycles.
The judges noted that the appellant did not dispute her score being below the cut-off. Hence, she was “not eligible” in the last completed round itself.
Read also: Supreme Court Restores Dowry Harassment Case, Says High Courts Cannot Conduct 'Mini-Trial' While
Decision
The bench concluded that DU had already held four spot rounds and was justified in closing admissions on September 30. Allowing a fifth round would “jeopardize the entire admission structure”.
The appeal was dismissed, with the Court stating there was no legal basis to compel DU to conduct another counselling round. No costs were imposed.
Case Title: Neha Malav v. Dean (Admissions), University of Delhi & Ors. (2025)
Matter Type: Letters Patent Appeal (LPA No. 666/2025)
Court: High Court of Delhi, Division Bench
Bench: Chief Justice & Justice Tushar Rao Gedela
Date of Decision: 3 November 2025