VANYA DANGWAL Vs. SHRI RAM COLLEGE OF COMMERCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for quashing of the admission of respondent No. 4 and the wait-listing of respondent No. 5 by the respondent No. 1/Shri Ram College of Commerce, which is affiliated with the respondent No. 3/University, for admission in an undergraduate course on sports basis for the academic year 2011-12, and further, for her selection to the single seat available in the said course. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 & 5 had passed Class XII in the academic year 2010-11 and they had applied to the respondent No. 1/College for admission on sports basis in the category of lawn tennis. Apart from the petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 & 5, a number of other candidates had applied to respondent No. 1/College for admission in the said seat. The criteria for distribution of marks in the sports category in the undergraduate course as prescribed by the respondent No. 3/University is that a candidate, who has participated at an international level would be given direct admission and a weightage of 75% would be given to candidates possessing certificates of best performance of the last three years with a weightage of 25% to be given on field trial.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that she along with the other candidates had appeared before the respondent No. 2/Sports Admission Committee appointed by the respondent No. 1/College on 5.7.2011, when field trials were fixed for lawn tennis. On the aforesaid date, though the petitioner did not claim entitlement to direct admission in the respondent No. 1/College on the ground of being a candidate of international level, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 did claim that they should be treated as international players for being granted direct admission in the college as they had played under the International Tennis Federation (ITF), Sri Lanka. The aforesaid candidates were however informed that if they wanted themselves to be considered as international players for laying a claim to direct admission under the University rules, they ought to get their certificates certified by the Advisor, Delhi University Sports Council. In view of the above, not only, the petitioner, but the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 had also participated in the field trials that were held on 5.7.2011.

(3.) The results of the aforesaid field trials for lawn tennis along with the results of other sports were declared by the respondent No. 1/College on 7.7.2011. As per the said results, the petitioner was assigned 50% marks in the category of "Certificates" and 25% marks in the category of "Field Trials". Thus, she had scored a total of 75% marks. Respondent No. 4 was given nil marks in the category of "Certificates" and 20 marks in the category of "Field Trials" but finally, in the remarks column, it was mentioned that she had been selected. As regards, respondent No. 5, she was again granted nil marks in the category of "Certificates" and 15 marks in the category of "Field Trial" and in the remarks column, it was noted that she was placed at Sr. No. 1 in the wait-list.