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

2025 Supreme(Gau) 2314

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Robin Phukan, J.
B. K. Wahed Ali H.S. School – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Rep. By The Secretary To The Govt. Of Assam, Education Secondary Department And Others – Respondents
WP(C) 2144 of 2025
Decided On : 25-04-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M K Choudhury, Mr P Bhardwaj
For the Respondent: SC, SEC. EDU., SC, A S S E B

Educational authorities must process institutional applications for admission permission fairly and cannot arbitrarily deny access to centralized admission portals when an institution’s feasibility and documentation have been submitted and are pending verification, ensuring that students’ access to education remains protected.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Educational Institutions - Regulation of admissions - Arbitrary restriction of access to centralized digital admission platforms - Failure to verify institutional feasibility reports - Legality of administrative action - An educational institution that has submitted necessary documentation and feasibility reports is entitled to fair consideration for inclusion in digital admission processes - Arbitrary denial of portal access without proper verification of regulatory criteria is unsustainable in law - Authorities have a duty to process applications within reasonable timeframes when institutional viability has been established. (Paras 2-9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, an educational institution established over two decades ago, sought judicial intervention to challenge the denial of access to a centralized student admission portal. The institution had previously undergone inspection, with favorable feasibility reports submitted to the relevant authorities. Despite this, access to the admission portal for the upcoming academic session was blocked, categorizing it as a non-permitted entity. The institution argued that this exclusion deprived students of admission opportunities and failed to account for existing regulatory compliance.

Findings of Court:
Following established judicial precedent, the court found that if an institution has applied for permission with the requisite records, the governing body must verify those records rather than summarily barring access to the admission system. The denial of service on an online portal, effectively preventing institutional operation, requires the respondent authorities to act in accordance with prescribed regulations regarding permission for student enrollment.

Issues: The primary issue was whether authorities could arbitrarily deny an educational institution access to a digital admission platform, thereby preventing it from conducting admissions, despite the institution having provided necessary feasibility documentation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court maintained that an institution that has fulfilled initial feasibility requirements deserves a fair review of its application for permission to conduct admissions. Administrative authorities are mandated to consider such cases within a stipulated time frame, following relevant regulations, and cannot deny access to essential digital infrastructure without proper scrutiny of the institution's verified credentials.

Result: Petition allowed. Respondent authorities directed to consider the case for granting admission permissions and to enable portal access, subject to the fulfillment of mandatory criteria.

Table of Content
1. procedural background and petitioner's claims for institutional recognition and admission portal access. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. parties' contentions and acknowledgment of governing legal precedents. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's analysis and reliance on binding precedent regarding educational institution admissions. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. court order directing portal access and permission for student admissions. (Para 9 , 10)

ORDER :

ROBIN PHUKAN, J.

Heard Mr. P. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, B.K. Wahed Ali H.S. School, has prayed for issuing direction to the respondent No. 2 to provincialise the petitioner school and the services of the teaching and non-teaching staffs of the petitioner school in light of the proposal and reports submitted and also to direct the respondent authorities to open the Darpan Portal for submission of applications for admission into H.S. 1st Year class for the academic session 2025-26, and to register the name of the petitioner school under Darpan Portal w.e.f. 2025 on the basis of fulfilment of the relevant criteria provided under the Revised Regulations of 2004 of the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council, and further to set aside and quash the Notification dated 12.04.2025.

3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present petition, are briefly stated as under:

“The petitioner school was established during 1995-2005 and it had approached the concerned authorities for permission to open higher classes. Thereafter, the Assam State School Education Board/respondent No. 4 submitted its feasibility report before the respondent authorities in respect of 30 numbers of higher secondary schools, including the petitioner school after making necessary inspection during the month of November and December.

It is the pleaded case of the petitioner school that prior to 2024-25, students were allowed to admit in the petitioner school into Higher Secondary 1st Year classes, but the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council, vide Notification dated 01.04.2024, has not allowed the petitioner school to conduct admission into Higher Secondary 1st Year class for the ensuing academic sessions 2024-25, on the ground that the petitioner school falls under the category of non-permitted private institution, and the petitioner school was also made disabled on the Darpan Portal to restrict all such institutions from admission. However, similarly placed schools have approached this Court by filing writ petitions and this Court was pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant registration/admission of students through Darpan Portal. Thereafter, again the authorities had issued one Notification dated 12.04.2025, whereby admission of students in Class-XI is allowed by registration under the Darpan Portal. Earlier, the petitioner school had applied for granting permission and feasibility report, was also given by the respondent No. 4 after scrutiny, however, this time the petitioner school is not allowed to avail the benefit of Darpan Portal to conduct admission into H.S. 1st Year for the academic session 2025-26, as a result of which the students are deprived of getting admission. Being aggrieved, the petitioner school has approached this Court by filing the present petition.”

4. Mr. Bharadwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner school was established during 1995-2005 and thereafter, the respondent No. 4, after inspection being carried out during the month of November and December submitted its feasibility report before the respondent authorities in respect of 30 numbers of higher secondary schools, including the petitioner school. Mr. Bharadwaj also submits that prior to 2024-2025, students were allowed to admit in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top