The sibling criterion for school admissions applies only if the siblings are studying in the same school and cannot be expanded to cover siblings studying in two different schools, even if managed by the same society or management.

C. Hari Shankar, J.

The petitioner, a minor child, has filed this writ petition, praying for issuance of a mandamus to the St. Marks Sr. Sec. School, Meera Bagh (Respondent No. 1 herein) to grant him admission in Class-I. The case of the petitioner is predicated on the premise that, on a proper application of the points allocated by the school, against various criteria, on the bases of which preferential admissions are determined, he would be entitled to 60 points, 35 points being available as he resides within 1 to 3 kilometres of school and 25 points under the “sibling” criterion. For ready reference, the allocation of points, for admission to the school, as set out in its brochure, may be reproduced thus:

“Parameters Points

	“Parameters	Points
(i)	Distance	40
	Area upto 1 km	40
	Area between 1 to 3 km/ areas
	where school transport is available	35
	Areas between 3 to 5 km	30
	Areas between 5 to 8 km	20
	Area more than 8 km	10
(ii)	Sibling studying in the school	25
(iii)	Girl Child	25
	Maximum	100”
(iv)	Alumni	10

2. The respondent does not dispute the entitlement, of the petitioner, to 35 points, by virtue of his residing within 1 to 3 kilometres from the school.

3. The controversy essentially revolves around the entitlement, of the petitioner, to 25 points which are allotted to cases in which the sibling of the aspiring student studies in the school. The petitioner seeks the benefit of this criterion on the ground that his sister, namely Prachi, is a student of St. Marks Girls. Sr. Sec. School. The submission of Ms. Rajeshwari, learned counsel arguing on behalf of the petitioner, is that, as both these schools are run by the same society/management the two siblings ought to be treated, for the purpose of allocation of points, as “the same school”.

4. To press home her argument, Ms. Rajeshwari has relied on various documents.

5. She has first drawn my attention to the publicity printout, of the “St. Mark's Sr. Sec. Public Schools”, which covers the St. Marks Sr. Sec. Public School, Meera Bagh, St. Marks Girls Sr. Sec. School, Meera Bagh (being the schools in which the petitioner seeks admission, and, in which his sister is studying, respectively) as well as the St. Mark's Sr. Sec. Public School, Janakpuri. The contention of Ms. Rajeshwari is that this document indicates that all the three schools, i.e. the St. Marks Sr. Sec. Public School, Meera Bagh, St. Marks Girls Sr. Sec. School, Meera Bagh and St. Marks Sr. Sec. Public School, Janakpuri, are functioning under the same society/management.

6. The second document, to which Ms. Rajeshwari refers, is again a printout of message from the Chairman of the St. Marks Girls Sr. Sec. School, Meera Bagh, as figuring on the website of the said school. The first paragraph of the said message reads thus:

“The school is run by St. Mark's Christian Educational Society. This Society runs St. Mark's Sr. Sec. Public School, Meera Bagh & St. Mark's Girls School, Meera Bagh too. The founder Chairman of the school Mr. T. P. Aggarwal has been working in the field of education since 1975. He has been awarded the Dr. Radhakrishnan Memorial National Teachers Award.”

7. Ms. Rajeshwari submits that it is clear, from this message, that the school in which the petitioner's sister is studying, and the school in which the petitioner aspires to obtain admission are run by the same society.

8. Ms. Rajeshwari next references to the well-known Anil Dev Singh, which determines the issue of fees which could be charged by public and private unaided schools.

9. Ms. Rajeshwari seeks to place reliance on the following passage, from the report:

“It is significant that the only two directors of the Pvt. Ltd. company in question are Sh. T.P. Aggarwal who is the Chairman of all the three