SHIFALI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was admitted in B.Tech Course in Computer Science and Engineering Branch with Respondent No.3-Institute in the Session 2010-2011, has filed the present petition for quashing of communication dated 31.08.2013 (Annexure P/3), vide which her claim of grant of scholarship for the years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 was denied. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner appeared in AIEEE on April 10, 2010 and secured 12571 rank. She got admission in B.Tech in Computer Science and Engineering in general category. Her rank in that category as a girl student was first. As per the scheme of scholarship notified by the Haryana State Counselling Society (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society'), dated 22.01.2010, the petitioner being topper in her category as a girl student was entitled to scholarship of Rs. 40,000/- per annum or the actual tuition fee, whichever was less. The petitioner was granted the scholarship for two years, namely, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, however for the years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, the scholarship was not paid. The representation made by the petitioner was rejected vide impugned communication. He further submitted that the reason for which the claim of the petitioner had been rejected cannot be justified as the decision to stop scholarship was taken by the Board of Governors of the Society in its meeting held on 09.01.2014 and the reason assigned is that there is shortage of funds. In the aforesaid meeting of the Board of Governors, scholarship scheme was decided to be discontinued from the year 2012-2013, onwards i.e. with the retrospective effect, which could not have been done.

(2.) On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that as per the scheme, the number of stipend/scholarships/freeships could be changed by the Society depending on availability of funds. As there were less students opting for engineering courses, the amount available with the society was not sufficient, thus the decision was taken to discontinue the scheme. However, he could not deny the fact that in the case in hand meeting of the Board of Governors of the Society was held on 09.01.2014 in which the decision to discontinue scholarship had been taken with retrospective effect from the year 2012- 2013.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paperbook. The fact that the petitioner got admission in B.Tech in Computer Science and Engineering course with respondent No.3-Institute in the session 2010-2011 is not in dispute. Another fact which is not in dispute is that the petitioner ranked first for admission in B.Tech Computer Science and Engineering with respondent No.3- Institute for the session 2010-2011.