Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANUROOP SINGHI
Devendra Kumar Kothari S/o Shri Sundar Lal Kothari – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of College Education, Directorate Of College Education – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's grievance regarding scholarship rejection. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments highlighting the alleged arbitrariness of rejection. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 10) |
| 3. court's reasoning on the interpretation of the scholarship eligibility. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. ruling quashing rejection and directing reconsideration. (Para 13) |
| 5. final order allowing the writ petition. (Para 14 , 15) |
ORDER :
ANUROOP SINGHI, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the communication dated 19.12.2025, vide which the application of the petitioner’s son – Mr. Prakhar Kothari (applicant), seeking grant of scholarship under the Swami Vivekananda Scholarship for Academic Excellence Scheme (hereinafter referred to as “the Scholarship Scheme”), has been rejected by the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abhinav Sharma submits that the rejection of the application filed by the applicant vide order dated 19.12.2025 is without any reasoning which is evident from the perusal of the said communication, however, it was only when the petitioner approached the respondent – Authority that he was communicated that the sole reason for rejec
The rejection of a scholarship application due to a family member's prior award is arbitrary, violating the scheme's intent to promote education.
Continuous capital gains from ancestral property cannot be excluded when assessing eligibility for scholarships aimed at financially needy students, reflecting a strong financial background.
Eligibility for scholarships is contingent upon accurate income reporting; discrepancies can lead to denial of benefits.
The court affirmed that students from weaker sections should not be denied scholarships due to procedural lapses if no dishonest intent is established.
A hyper-technical approach in scholarship applications contradicts the objective of promoting education for underprivileged students, necessitating consideration of merit-based eligibility.
The court ruled that the exclusion of management quota students from post matric scholarships does not violate fundamental rights, adhering to a lawful policy decision.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
