IMPORTANT POINT
The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 guarantees every child's right to education, and administrative decisions regarding admission must be based on clear and justifiable grounds, not on retrofitted reasons post-admission.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

G.S.PATEL, J. - There is an Affidavit in Reply. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and the. Petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

2. The Petition is brought by five 11-year-old students through their parents and natural guardians. Respondent No. 1 is the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti. This is an autonomous organisation and throughout the country it operates and administers the Navodaya Vidyalaya Scheme or project. The 2nd Respondent is the 1st Respondent's regional office. Respondent No. 3 is the local Vidyalaya in Taluka Rajapur, district Ratnagiri.

3. The five Petitioners say that they were students of Standard V in a school in Ratnagiri. They have given their addresses in Ratnagiri district. Their families, however, originally are from Kolhapur. As we shall see, some capital is sought to be made of this in opposition to the Petition.

4. From April 2020, across the globe, humankind fell into a state it had never encountered, or possibly never imagined could come to pass: isolation, confinement, sickness and death faced us in that unprecedented Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown. In August 2020, at a time when that condition continued in its intensity, and even as we had begun to find some solutions in digital technology , the Petitioners sent in their applications to participate in what is called the JNVST -2021 for admission to the 3rd Respondent Vidyalaya in Standard V. The last date for submitting form was 30/12/2020. An examination was scheduled on 30/3/2021. The pandemic situation and its resultant administrative exigencies resulted in that examination being postponed to 16/5/2021.

5. JNVST - 2021 was again rescheduled to 11/8/2021, when it was finally held. All five Petitioners appeared. The results were declared on 28/9/2021. All Petitioners were selected for admission. Their names were in the merit list issued by the respondent in question. A copy of that merit list for Standard V is at Exhibit "B". Copies of the marks statements of the Petitioners are from Exhibit "C" onwards. These documents are not disputed.

6. Even in 2021, we were still very much in the online mode. On 8/8/2021, the Petitioners submitted their documents online. They were all granted admission. Copies of the admission forms and the certificates issued by the Head Master are annexed at Exhibit "D". Again, these are undisputed.

7. Six weeks later, there came the impugned orders of 26/11/2021 assailed in the Petition, one for each Petitioner. Copies are compiled in Exhibit "E" collectively from page 68. The subject line of each order is about the 'cancellation' of admission for each of the five Petitioners. The admission granted is thus undisputed.

8. The impugned orders set out four distinct reasons for cancellation, and all five impugned orders are identical. The first reason is arguably the strangest. It says that Petitioners obtained admission 'in the middle of' Standard V. That reason cannot be sustained. It would have been a reason for a threshold rejection of the Petitioners' applications in August 2020, denying each of them a right even to participate in JNVST -2021. Far from any such denial, the Petitioners seem to have been led down the garden path: allowed to participate, appear for the examination or screening test, qualify, have their names on the merit list, be issued mark sheets and even granted admission.

9. The second reason for cancellation is that there is no 'inward stamp' of the Tehsildar's office for the Standard V. Again, this is hardly a reason for cancellation. If that was a pre-requisite, it had to precede admission. It could not be a 'discovery' made postadmission.

10. The third reason given is that the admission document for Standard V does not 'mention the month'. This is of the same class as the second reason.

11. The fourth is the lack of a stamp on a caste document. This falls in the same category as the second and third reasons.

12. On this basis, and on this basis alone, the admission was sought to be ca