MAMTA Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a rather peculiar case where the petitioner approached the respondent for admission in B.Ed. programme 2012-13 under the OBC category, after succeeding in the written examination as well as in the interview in June, 2012. The course commenced from 23.7.2012 and the petitioner started attending classes as well as the school experience programme. In August, 2012, the petitioner was informed orally that her OBC category, under which she had appeared, was not covered under the reserved category of the Central List. Petitioner was also orally informed that she could give a request in writing for consideration of her candidature under the General category. The petitioner made an application under the RTI Act seeking information regarding the marks secured by her in the written examination and interview of the entrance test of B.Ed. course 2012-13 and also the cut-off list of general category students of the said examination.

(2.) THE petitioner also made a request in writing to the respondent no.2 to consider her candidature under the General Category. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents kept assuring her that she would be considered under the general category. On this assurance the petitioner kept attending classes and also school experience programme between the months of August to December, 2012, however, on 11.12.2012, the petitioner was shocked to receive a notice wherein she was informed that she has been unauthorizedly attending classes and she was directed not to attend classes in future.

(3.) THE case of the petitioner is that initially she applied under the OBC category for getting admission in B.Ed. programme 2012-13, but when she was informed in the month of August, 2012 that petitioner does not belong to the OBC category of the Central List, she immediately approached the respondent no.2 i.e. the head of the Department and requested her to treat her admission in the general category. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was under the bona fide belief that the respondents were considering her request and she had no reason to think otherwise else the respondent would not have permitted her to attend classes and in fact her work was appreciated by one of the teachers, copy of the appreciation letter has been placed on record. Ms.Kapoor submits that only in December the respondents informed the petitioner not to attend classes.