SEEMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Neeraj Tiwari representing respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) CONTENTION of the Counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner, a handi ­capped lady, had been sent letter for appearing in the counselling but when she had gone to appear, she has been informed that she is not eligible for appear ­ing in the counselling. Hence this writ petition for a direction to the respon ­dents to permit her to appear in the counselling.

(3.) AS regards the qualifications, the minimum qualifications are pro ­vided under Clause 4 of the general instructions in the following terms : ....Vernacular Text Ommited....