Back
2003 Supreme(Del) 296
High Court Of Delhi
SOCIAL JURIST A LAWYERS GROUP - Appellant
Versus
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN - Respondent
CIV.WRIT PETITION 1984 of 2003
Decided On : 03/25/2003
ASHOK AGARWAL, NISHAKANT PANDEY, S.RAJAPPA
Applications of students should not be rejected on the ground of want of birth certificate. Affidavit or medical expert determination of age to be accepted. Applications to be considered on merits.
Headnote:
Birth Certificate - Student Applications - The court directed that applications of students should not be rejected on the ground of want of birth certificate. Affidavit or medical expert determination of age to be accepted. Applications to be considered on merits.
Fact of the Case:
The court was informed that the applications of the students have been accepted and are under consideration. The respondent's counsel stated that the applications will not be rejected on the ground of want of birth certificate and that the applications will be decided on merits.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition, directing that the applications of the students should not be rejected on the ground of want of birth certificate. It was further directed that the affidavit or medical expert determination of age should be accepted, and the applications should be considered on merits.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: Applications of students should not be rejected on the ground of want of birth certificate. Affidavit or medical expert determination of age to be accepted. Applications to be considered on merits.
Final Decision: The petition stands disposed of with the court's directions regarding the consideration of student applications.
( 1 ) LEARNED counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 states that the applications of the students have been accepted and are under consideration. He further submitted that applications will not be rejected on the ground of want of birth certificate. It is stated that the affidavit will be accepted or in case of need, the student may be sent to the medical expert for determination of age. He further submitted that the applications shall be considered on merits and accordingly, the applications will be decided. The case may not be cited as a precedent. The petition stands disposed of.
