K RAJ AMRUTH Vs. JAWAHAR NAVODAYA VIDALAYA
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K Raj Amruth
Jawahar Navodaya Vidalaya
Click here to view full judgement.
C.Praveen Kumar, J. -
(1.)Petitioner, who is 11 years old, represented by his father, filed Writ Petition No.33396 of 2018 seeking issuance of writ of Mandamus to declare the proceedings dated 3.9.2018 issued by the 1st respondent, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to issue consequential direction to the 1st respondent i.e., Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya to admit the petitioner into class-VI.
(2.)The facts in issue in a nutshell are as under :
As stated above, the writ petition came to be filed challenging the proceedings dated 3.9.2018, wherein the petitioner's admission into class-VI in the 1st respondent-school was cancelled on the ground that the petitioner has not submitted the school recognition certificate, though admittedly he studied up to 5th class in the 3rd respondent-school, which was allowed to be run by the 2nd respondent. It is his case that he applied for entrance examination, after completing the 5th class, in the 1st respondentschool pursuant to an advertisement in the website, wherein the 3rd respondent-school was shown to be a recognized school by the 1st respondent. Though the appellant qualified in the written examination/entrance examination in the 1st respondent-school, his admission is cancelled on the ground that he did not submit the school recognition certificate where he studied class-V during the year 2017-2018. The same was challenged in the writ petition, wherein the learned Single Judge of the High Court for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh did not accept the plea taken therein which led to filing of the present Writ Appeal.
(3.)Sri P.V.Krishnaiah, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would contend that though the appellant joined in another school and finished one year of education, he pleads that the act of the 1st respondent in canceling the admission on the ground that the appellant failed to produce school recognition certificate is highly illegal. He pleads that the 3rd respondent-school, among other schools, was included in the drop down box provided online by the 1st respondent-school and the appellant got selected for admission in the written test conducted on 21.4.2008 for those who applied online seeking admission into class-VI. It is stated that the drop down box only include recognized schools necessitating incumbents, who seek admission into the school, to fill up the form online and that the schools, which are not recognized, are not included in the drop down box. Since the name of the 3rd respondent-school is included in the drop down box as recognized institution, the appellant herein applied through online and appeared for the written examination conducted by the 1st respondent and got himself selected. Having allowed the appellant to participate in the examination, the act of the 1st respondent in canceling the admission on the ground that school recognition certificate is not produced is illegal, improper and incorrect.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.