The main legal point established is that a writ petition is not maintainable in cases lacking a public element and where the action is essentially of a private character.

JUDGMENT :

JAVED IQBAL WANI, J.

1. The petitioner a minor has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India through her father, namely, Mr. Showkat Hussain Thakur and has implored for the following reliefs:

(a) Commanding the private respondent to ensure the admission of the petitioner in the class 11th for the session 2022-2023 as the petitioner has been in the school from her pre-nursery classes from 2010 as denial of the admission will affect the petitioner over all development and her mindset as petitioner will be away from her classmates and friends without her fault.

(b) Quashing the denial of the admission in the class 11th for the session 2022-2023 as inhuman, illegal act of harassing, humiliation, exploitation besides being against the mandate of the Article 21-A and provision of Right to Education Act.

(c) Directing the respondents not to harass the petitioner directly or indirectly and allow them to pursue her studies without suppression, humiliation and exploitation till they are complete their courses in the school.

(d) Directing the respondents to compensate the petitioner caused by the omissions and commissions of the private respondents by their inhuman, illegal, deviant behavior which shall be determined by the expert in the field of the education field as appointed by the Hon’ble Court keeping in view the status of the petitioner and his children and pass decree accordingly in favour of the petitioner.

(e) Directing the private respondents to submit the details of the information sought by the father of the petitioner in his application under law which has been retained unnecessarily by the private respondents along with details of income and expenses through the respondent no. 2 of the school on year wise basis from the year 2010.”

2. The background facts under the shade and cover of which the aforesaid reliefs have been prayed are that the petitioner claiming to be the student of a Christian Missionary School, namely, Tyndale Biscoe and Mallinson School (for short “TBMS”) Srinagar, came to be denied admission in class 11th for the session 2022-23 in the said school owing to the reason that the father of the petitioner being a practising Advocate had conducted various court cases/cases against the private respondents herein and their family members for having illegally taken over the administration of TBMS as also for the alleged acts of embezzlement, misappropriation and illegally taking over the properties of TBMS having, thus, developed evil design against the father of the petitioner as also the petitioner and in the process by denying the admission violated the Right to Education of the petitioner enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India as also the provisions of Right to Education Act as the TBMS is a school receiving grant-in-aid from the Government and is affiliated and recognized by the State/official respondents, thus, amenable to writ jurisdiction of this Court.

3. Objections to the petition have been filed by the respondents 3 and 4 wherein it is being averred that none of the fundamental, legal and statutory rights of the petitioner have been infringed by the answering respondents and that the reliefs sought in the petition are not available to the petitioner in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court passed in case titled as Committee of Management, LA Martiniere College Lucknow through its Principal and Another vs. Vatsal Gupta and Others, 2016 SC Online SC 743 and that besides the petitioner, five more students in fact came to be denied admission on the basis of the recommendations of the disciplinary committee for their misconduct including indulging of the petitioner in cheating while using mobile phone during Term-I examination as also having regard to the reports/complaints of various teachers/invigilators regarding the conduct of the petitioner and as such, the TBMS being a private unaided school decided not to grant admission to the petitioner in cl