Back
1994 Supreme(Del) 522
High Court Of Delhi
PAYAL GUPTA - Appellant
Versus
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DELHI - Respondent
Civil Writ 2788 of 1994
Decided On : 08/08/1994
AVINASH AHLAVAT, N.K.KAUL, Navin Anand, R.NATH, S.K.Kaul, S.RAVINDER BHAT
An unaided recognized school cannot of its own fix a criteria of not admitting its own students to Class XI unless they secured certain minimum percentage of marks in Class X examination which is a public examination. Such criteria would be arbitrary, unreasonable and irrational.
Headnote:
EDUCATION - ADMISSION - UNAIDED RECOGNIZED SCHOOL - CRITERIA FOR ADMISSION TO CLASS XI - PUBLIC EXAMINATION - ARBITRARY AND UNREASONABLE - WRIT JURISDICTION - ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a student who passed Class X examination of the Central Board of Secondary Education (C.B.S.E.) from Cambridge School, was denied admission to Class XI in the same school on the ground that she did not secure 50% marks in aggregate as per the school circular. The circular stated that admission to Class XI was not automatic but a fresh admission even for those students who would pass Class X from Cambridge School itself and that minimum qualifying percentage for being considered for admission for students who passed Class X from Cambridge School would be in the region of 50% in aggregate.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that an unaided recognized school cannot of its own fix a criteria of not admitting its own students to Class XI unless they secured certain minimum percentage of marks in Class X examination which is a public examination. Such criteria would be arbitrary, unreasonable and irrational.
Issues: 1. Whether an unaided recognized school can fix a criteria of not admitting its own students to Class XI unless they secured certain minimum percentage of marks in Class X examination which is a public examination? 2. Whether such criteria would be arbitrary, unreasonable and irrational?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that rule 145 of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973, which empowers the head of every recognized unaided school to regulate admissions to the school or to any class thereof either on the basis of admission test or on the basis of result in a particular class or school, is subject to rule 138, which provides that a student who fails at any public examination shall not, on that account, be refused re-admission in the school or class by the school from which he had appeared at such examination. 2. The court further held that a public examination cannot be equated with an admission test, or result in Class X be made basis for admission or readmission to Class XI in the same school.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed and a direction was issued to respondents 3 and 4 to admit the petitioner to Class XI of their school.
( 1 ) RULE D. B. The petitioner, a girl student, who passed Class X examination of the Central Board of Secondary Education (C. B. S. E.) from the Cambridge School, Ring Road, Srinivaspuri, securing 44. 6% marks in aggregate, seeks admission to Class XI in the same school in which admission has been denied to her on the ground that she did not secure 50% marks in aggregate as per the school circular dated 4 October 1993. This circular was addressed to the parents of the students by the Principal of the School stating that admission to Class X was not automatic but a fresh admission even for those students who would pass Class X from the Cambridge School itself and that minimum qualifying percentage for being considered for admission for students who passed Class X from Cambridge School would be in the region of 50% in aggregate. It was also mentioned that in addition to that the conduct of the students should be satisfactory, and it was, therefore, stressed on the parents that all students of Cambridge School interested in admission to Class XI should make sure that they get at least 50% marks and maintain good conduct. This circular is challenged before us in this petition and a declaration is sought that denying admission to the students who passed Class X C. B. S. E. Examination 1994 with less than 50% marks was illegal, without any legal basis, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution, and a further declaration is sought that the respondent have no power to deny admission under the Delhi School Education Act and the Rules, 1973 (for short the Act and the Rule ). A writ of mandamus or any other writ, order of direction is sought commanding the respondent to ensure admission of the petitioner to Class Xl of the Cambridge School.
( 2 ) THERE are four respondents, being respectively, (1) Lt. Governor of Delhi, (2) The Director of Education, (3) The Manager, Cambridge School, and (4) The Principal, Cambridge School. Originally when the petition was filed, there were four petitioners, all students of Cambridge School, who had secured less than 50% marks in aggregate in Class X Examination of C. B. S. E. and sought admission to Class XI. Another writ petition (CWP No. 2977/94, - Reema Goyal and others v. Lt. Governor of Delhi and others) was also filed in which there were about 10 students all similarly situated. That writ petition was withdrawn as the School authorities scaled down the aggregate of 50% marks to 45% which was the position a year earlier in the school. In this writ petition as well two students withdrew on similar ground. One or two students in writ petition No. 2977/94 of Reema Goyal and others and one in this petition had secured about 35% marks in aggregate, and they said that they will either reappear in the examination papers in which they have failed or would seek admission elsewhere.
( 3 ) THE present petition has been pressed by Payal Gupta, the first petitioner in this petition, though, as noted above, she secured 44. 6% marks in aggregate. Mr. Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, said that the stand of the fourth respondent, the Principal, should not be rigid and the figure 44. 6% could have been rounded upto 45% for the petitioner to get admission in Class XI of the school. He said that the mother of the petitioner was a kidney patient and was on dialysis and her father was a Government servant and it would be impossible for the girl to get admission in any other school in view of the situation regarding admission in public schools as existing in Delhi today. This was not agreed to by Mr. Kaul, learned counsel appearing for the school. He said the impugned circular under which a student was required to secure a minimum of 50% marks in aggregate in Class X examination was relaxed to 45% as this circular was issued in mid session and in the earlier year a condition was stipulated that those students securing less than 45% marks in aggregate in Class X examinati
