SEEMA RANI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak by which she has been declared ineligible for admission to the B.Ed. course and her candidature for the examination has been cancelled. A few facts may be noticed.

(2.) According to the Prospectus for admission to the B.Ed. course for the year 1989-90, 15% of the seats were to be allotted to the outside candidates and 85% of the seats had to be filled up from amongst the candidates who had passed the qualifying examination from one of the three universities in Haryana. However, there was one exception. In case a candidate had not passed the qualifying examination from one of the three universities of Haryana, he could still be considered against 85% of the seats if he produced of Haryana Domicile Certificate issued after August 31, 1988 by the competent authority.

(3.) The petitioner applied for admission to the B.Ed. course against one of the 85% seats. Apparently, she had not passed the qualifying examination from one of the three universities in Haryana. She, however, produced a Domicile Certificate dated August 28, 1989 issued by the City Magistrate, Rohtak, She was admitted by the College. In due course, the papers were forwarded to the University. On March 17, 1990, the University forwarded the certificate to the City Magistrate for verification. On May 17, 1990, the City Magistrate reported that the petitioner was not a resident of village Kharawar and that she had "obtained her Haryana Domicile Certificate fraudulently." . Accordingly, the certificate was cancelled. On receipt of this communication, the University vide its letter dated May 24, 1990 a photostat copy of which has been produced by the respondents, informed the Principal, K.M. College of Education, Bhiwani that the Domicile Certificate of the petitioner having been cancelled, she was ineligible for admission of the B.Ed. course. On receipt of this letter, the Principal sent a communication dated May 26, 1990 informing her that she had been declared ineligible for admission to the Course. A copy of this letter has been produced by the petitioner as Annexure P-2. Vide notification dated September 13, 1990 when the result of the examination was declared, the petition's candidature was shown to have been cancelled. Aggrieved by the action of the University and the College in cancelling her candidature the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition.