The Delhi High Court has rejected a student’s request for a supernumerary IIT seat, holding that sympathy and possible academic loss cannot replace prescribed admission eligibility.
In Ashi Agarwal v Union of India, decided on 1 October 2026, the petitioner alleged evaluation errors in JEE Main 2025 and said illness prevented her effective participation in a later session. She sought admission in 2026 while preserving the academic opportunity she said had been lost.
Justice Jasmeet Singh held that the governing 2026 information brochure applied when her representation was considered. The petitioner did not satisfy its eligibility criterion, and the scheme contained no power to relax that mandatory condition merely because she had qualified to attempt an earlier examination.
The Court said a supernumerary seat is not an ordinary consequential remedy in a competitive, merit-based system. Without proof that official illegality caused the lost opportunity, judicial discretion could not create an admission route outside the rules or reopen a completed examination cycle.
The petition and consequential applications were dismissed.