- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Devendra Pratap Singh for the respondents 2, 3 and 4 and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 5 and 6.
(2.) BY the instant petition, the petitioner, who is a minor and has filed the petition through his father -Shiv Kumar, has challenged the order dated 03.08.2013 (Annexure No.10 to the petition) by which the representation of the petitioner challenging his non -selection for admission in Class 1st of Kendriya Vidhyalaya, JRC, Bareilly Cantt, Bareilly under the Right to Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the RTE Act, 2009), has been rejected.
(3.) IN the order rejecting the representation of the petitioner it has been mentioned that for admission under the RTE Act, 2009 for the academic session 2013 -14 as many as 96 students were registered amongst them the petitioner figured at Serial No. 87. It has been stated that in total 30 seats were to be allotted under the RTE Act, 2009 and as there were more candidates than the number of seats available, the selection was carried out by draw of lots in which, unfortunately, the petitioner could not succeed and, therefore, was denied admission. A detailed counter -affidavit has been filed explaining as to why the ultimate selection was made by draw of lots as also the reason why the petitioner could not succeed in getting admission.;