KRITIKA GULATI Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:

(2.) RULE . With the consent of counsel for the parties present writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.

(3.) THE necessary facts, to be noticed for disposal of the present writ petition, are that vide notice dated 25.7.2011 respondent no.2 college had notified that a few seats are lying vacant in B.A. (Prog), B.Com (Prog), Sanskrit (H) and Philosophy (Hons) against the withdrawal cases in General Category of the current session 2011-2012. Students were informed that those who wish to seek admission in the abovesaid courses may come to the college for admission till the stipulated date. A copy of this notice, duly signed by the Principal of respondent no.2 college, has been placed on record. The petitioner is a student, who was provisionally admitted to the course of B.Com (Prog.) first year in respondent no.2 college for the academic session 2011-2012. The petitioner passed Class XII examination and secured 74.5% (one language and three elected subjects). Pursuant to the notice dated 25.7.2011 issued by respondent no.2 college, the petitioner, vide application form dated 9.8.2011, applied for admission in respondent no.2 college in B.Com (Prog.) in General Category, which is evident from the perusal of the application form, a copy of which has been placed on record. Along with the said application form, the petitioner submitted all the relevant documents including Mark Sheet, Migration Certificate issued by CBSE, Provisional-cum-Character Certificate, etc., to respondent no.2 college. Consequently the petitioner was granted provisional admission by respondent no.2 college on 9.8.2011, subject to condonation of delay by the Vice-Chancellor, University of Delhi. The petitioner filled up her admission form on 9.8.2012. As per the petition, the petitioner did not seek admission in the category of Defence Personnel as has been erroneously understood and made out by respondent no.1 University. The petitioner obtained admission in the general category. Vide communication dated 10.8.2011 respondent no.2 college requested the Vice-Chancellor of respondent no.1 University for condonation of delay in admission against the withdrawal cases for the academic session 2011-2012 in respect of four students including the petitioner herein. By the communication dated 23.8.2011 respondent no.1 University asked respondent no.2 college to submit a fresh proposal along with relevant documents in the enclosed proforma and the cut off notified by the college in the courses to which the four students were admitted, for due consideration. It was further mentioned in the said communication that with regard to the admission of the petitioner, the necessary documents be provided in support of the petitioner being ward of ex-serviceman, mentioning the category under which she had been offered admission. Along with the covering letter dated 12.9.2011, which was sent to respondent no.1, respondent no.2 enclosed the duly filled proforma and also prayed for condonation of delay. Vide letter dated 19.10.2011 respondent no.2 college again sent a duly completed proforma along with the relevant documents to respondent no.1 University for necessary action including a copy of the ex-serviceman identity card of the father of the petitioner, who was a Commandant in the Indian Navy. Request for condonation of delay in admission was again sought. It is the case of the petitioner that although the petitioner did not apply in the category of ,,Defence Personnel, however, since respondent no 2 College demanded a copy of the identity card petitioner supplied the same. By the impugned letter dated 14/18.11.2011 respondent no.1 University conveyed to respondent no.2 College that the matter of condonation of delay of four candidates was considered at the appropriate level of the University and so far as the provisional admission of the petitioner is concerned the petitioner was admitted to the B.Com (Prog.) as a ward of ex-serviceman, which is irregular and had been annulled. Admission of one more student was also annulled. College was requested to cancel the provisional admission under intimation to the University. Respondent no.2 college vide communication dated 25/26.4.2012 conveyed to the University that the petitioner was admitted against the withdrawal case due to her debating ability and other activities. It was categorically stated that petitioner was not admitted against the Ex-serviceman Quota though there was a soft corner for her on account of this defence background of her father. Condonation of delay was again sought. Vide communication dated 29.5.2012, respondent no.1 University conveyed to respondent no.2 college that the admission of the petitioner had already been annulled by the competent authority.