SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATEEK JALAN
Utkarsh Rai – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Technological University – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)--The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.

1. The petitioner was a candidate for admission to the respondent No.1- Delhi Technological University ["the University"] for the B.Tech course in the 2021-22 session. The petitioner applied in the Children and Wards of Defence Personnel category ["the CW category"]. His grievance is that he was denied admission because he was considered in Priority-VI in the CW category, instead of Priority- IV, to which he claimed entitlement. According to the petitioner, he would have been admitted to the University, if he had been considered in Priority-IV.

Facts

2. The University invited applications for the course in question by way of an Admission Brochure, which has been placed on record. It provides for a reservation of 5% of total seats for the CW category, and lays down various priorities within the CW category, in which candidates would be considered.

3. Priorities-IV and VI, with which we are concerned in this petition, read as follows:

    "Priority IV - Wards of disabled in service and boarded/invalid out with disability attributable to military service. Required Certifi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top