M.P. Birla v. King-Edward Medical College

In 1954, the Supreme Court gave a major judgment on medical admissions. A medical student, M.P. Birla, was admitted to a medical course without clearing the entrance exam. He later performed well in the exams but was asked to leave, as his admission was deemed invalid.

The court held that his admission was not invalid. They said that his intention was to study, not to exploit the college. This case has a ripple effect on admissions, saying that a student's intention plays a significant role in determining their admission's validity.

What do you guys think? Is the court's decision justified? Should a student's intention be a deciding factor in admissions, or should the rules be strictly followed? In the context of AP LAWCET, does this judgment have any relevance?