$~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 25.03.2026 + LPA 810/2024, CM APPL. 48040/2024, CM APPL. 48041/2024 &

CM APPL. 66934/2025 POOJA AS GUARDIAN OF BABY DEVANSHI JAISAWAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aayush Agarwala and Mr. Vipul Singh, Advocates.

versus AADHARSHILA VIDYAPEETH & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Jyoti Taneja, Adv for R-1.

Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, PC, GNCTD with Ms. Chandrika Sachdeva and Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advocates for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA TEJAS KARIA, J. (Oral CM APPL. 48039/2024 (Delay

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the averments made in the instant Application.

2. The prayer made is allowed and the delay of 72 days in filing the present Appeal stands condoned.

3. Accordingly, the Application is disposed of.

LPA 810/2024

4. The present intra court Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 08.05.2024 (“Impugned Judgment”) passed in W.P.(C)

13354/2023 (“Writ Petition”), whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition relying upon the judgment of this Court in Ankit Kumar v.

GNCTD, Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:3161.

5. The Appellant has filed this Appeal specifically to challenge the conclusions reached in Paragraph Nos. 5 to 8 of the Impugned Judgment. The Impugned Judgment observed that although Respondent No. 1 – School lacked a legitimate basis for refusing admission to the Appellant’s ward, the expiration of the relevant Academic Year precluded the Court from issuing an order for admission in the subsequent Academic Year. The Appellant maintains that she has been unjustly penalized as her Writ Petition was filed within the same Academic Year in which the admission was denied. Accordingly, the Appellant has prayed for moulding the relief to ensure justice is delivered to her ward.

6. The Appellant had applied for admission of her ward in Respondent No. 1 – School in EWS / DG / CWSN category for Class I for the Academic Year 2023-2024 by submitting necessary documents such as caste certificate, income certificate, etc. During the draw of lots conducted by Respondent No. 2, Directorate of Education (“DoE”), held on 14.03.2023, name of the Appellant’s ward was selected for admission in Respondent No.

1 – School.

7. The Appellant had approached Respondent No. 1 – School for verification of the documents and complete the admission process, but she was denied entry and advised that she would receive further communication from Respondent No. 1 – School. The Appellant subsequently sent multiple communications to Respondent No. 1 – School and Respondent No. 2 – DoE, requesting admission for her ward. Despite being allotted a seat at Respondent No. 1 – School, the Appellant was informed that admission for EWS children could not be granted until all seats for the general category were filled. Accordingly, the Appellant’s ward was placed on a waiting list to be admitted only after the general category seats had been filled.

8. Accordingly, the Appellant filed the Writ Petition on 07.10.2023 before this Court seeking direction against Respondent No. 1 – School to grant admission in terms of the list of selected candidates through the draw of lots conducted by Respondent No. 2 - DoE, for the Academic Year 2023-

2024.

9. On the first date of hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1 – School sought time to take instructions as to the availability of seat in Class I. On 15.12.2023, the learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 – School requested for adjournment, however, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 2 - DoE, submitted that as per the data circulated by the DoE, there were vacancies in Respondent No.

1 – School in Class I for the Academic Year 2023-2024.

10. On 21.12.2023, the learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 – School informed the learned Single Judge that the name of the Appellant’s ward was not in the list of seats allotted to Respondent No. 1 – School