RATIK KAPUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the letter dated 14.10.2014 (Annexure P/17) whereby respondent No. 2 -Society for Cultural Resources and Training has denied the scholarship to the petitioner for three seats of U.T. Chandigarh. A perusal of the communication dated 14.10.2014 would go on to show that the petitioner had appeared for test in painting at New Delhi for grant of scholarship. The denial was on the basis that he had not achieved the requisite standard as laid down under the scheme which had to be "outstanding" or failing which "very good". Thus, the denial was on the ground that he was not found meritorious enough to award the scholarship. Resultantly the said decision is the subject matter of challenge.

(2.) The respondent No. 2 -society has raised various issues including issue of maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that it was not engaged in public activities and therefore, petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. On merits, it has been pleaded that the petitioner had applied for grant of scholarship in Painting (Visual Arts) and gone through the process of selection viz. interview and test. The Regional Selection Committee had graded him as "good" and the candidates were graded as 'outstanding', 'very good', 'good' and 'average'. On account of having failed to attain the 'outstanding' or 'very good' criteria, the scholarship was not granted. The scholarship could not be claimed as a matter of right and total of 7 candidates were found eligible for award of scholarship and had been called for interview from 16.5.2014 to 21.5.2014. None of the candidate had been awarded "outstanding", therefore, no candidate was awarded scholarship from UT Chandigarh in the first phase. However, one candidate Ms. Anhad Biyan who had appeared in the test on 18.5.2014 was awarded 'very good' grade and was awarded scholarship from UT Chandigarh during the second phase.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that since there were three seats for UT Chandigarh and therefore, the petitioner was entitled for consideration and the merit list should have been prepared and the petitioner was entitled for the benefit of scholarship. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Audi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mohotsav Smark Trust v/s. V.R. Rudani, : (1989) 2 S.C.C. 691 to submit that once the society was doing public duty and especially awarding scholarship, it would be amenable to writ jurisdiction. The relevant portion reads as under: -