Rakesh Tiwari, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Divakar Rai Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sunita Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Perused the record.
(2.) THE petitioner passed his High School from Delhi Public School, Aligarh in 2008 and obtained 92% marks. He appeared combined entrance examination for class 11th and Diploma in Engineering on 2.6.2008 opting Physics, Chemistry & Biology as his first choice. THE petitioner had applied under two categories for admission in the University i.e. under the special categories of S.M. category which is for outstanding sportsman and under CA category which is for children of alumni or old students of the University and as such the petitioner was not admitted by the University in either of the aforesaid two categories of S.M. and C.A. His name did not find place in the list of selected candidates. On receipt of an unconfirmed information that cut-off mark of the last student admitted in the aforesaid category of alumni/old students was lower than the petitioner. Whether an application dated 1.10.2008 was moved by the father of the petitioner, who was alumni of the Aligarh Muslim University. An application was moved by the father of the petitioner on 24.9.2008 under the Right to Information Act regarding percentage of marks obtained by him in entrance examination. He was informed that the petitioner had obtained 39% marks in the combined entrance examination and that the last candidate, who had been granted admission in general category had secured 47.75 marks. He also moved an application dated 6.10.2008 to the authority under the Right to Information Act for being provided with complete details about the admissions made in class XI in all the categories including waiting list and list of candidates selected in different categories.
(3.) THE respondent University vide their letter dated 3.11.2008 replied that details of percentage of last candidates admitted under the category of children of alumni/old boys cannot be provided to him and instead of giving details of all selected candidates in class XI the respondents rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the case of the petitioner does not relate to life and liberty. The petitioner claims that he has been discriminated and though he has brought all the relevant facts to the notice of the authorities of the University including the cases of Sri Tayyab All and Sri Faisal Qureshi, who had been admitted on lower marks than the petitioner yet no action was taken by the authorities to remove the discrepancies.;