- (1.) ARUN Tandon, J. Heard Sri A. P. Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) PETITIONER is aggrieved by an order passed by the Principal, District Education & Training Institution, Allahabad dated 18th May, 2004 whereby the admission of the petitioner has been cancelled. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that in pursuance of the entrance examination conducted by the respondents for admission to B. T. C. Course in the year 2001, the petitioner was successful and was admitted in the said B. T. C. Training Course and was allotted for admission the District Education and Training Institute, Allahabad. It is further stated that the petitioner has completed his Course and also appeared in first and second paper of the examinations of the said Course which commenced from 18th May, 2004. During the period of examinations the petitioner has been served with the impugned order, whereby his admission has been cancelled on the ground that one Sushil Kumar Pandey, who was entitled to the benefits of the reservated category in respect of the Physically handicapped category was illegally refused admission and as a consequence thereto this Court passed an order directing the respondents to admit Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey in the said reserved category of physically handicapped. Since there was no other vacancy available for B. T. C. Training Course, 2001 to accommodate Sushil Kumar Pandey, the Principal of the Institute passed the impugned order cancelling the admission of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is the last candidate admitted in the said Course for the general category male. On behalf of the petitioner it is further contended that the petitioner had been admitted after passing the entrance examination. He has not played any fraud nor he has misrepresented before any authority concerned. It is not permissible under law to cancel the admission of the petitioner after he has completed the course and has undertaken the first and second papers of the said examination in respect of the said course. In support of the said contentions, petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1990 S. C. 1075, Sanatan Gauda v. Berhampur University and others, as also upon the judgment of this Court reported in A. W. C 1990 1524, Shikshak Abhibhavak Sangh, Jai Narain Inter College, Varanasi and others v. Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh and others.
(3.) ON behalf of the respondents it is contended that since the petitioner had been admitted by mistake against the vacancy which should have been reserved for the candidate belonging to the Physically handicapped category, therefore this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not grant any relief to the petitioner on the basis of his aforesaid incorrect admission. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present writ petition.;