SHASHI BHUSAN PATHAK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner sought to raise the following grievanees in public interest. The first grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents, while taking admission of the students under the general category i.e. category 3 (vii) of the 'Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Admission Guidelines 2000, cannot give preference, to the students coining from other Kendriya Vidyalayas who were admitted in those Kendriya Vidyalaya under the said general category, over the students of general category who are more meritorious. The second grievance is that the minimum eligible age limit prescribed as five years for admission in class I and consequently 15 years in class XI is bad in law. The third grievance is with regard to the policy of transfer within the schools and the last one is for a direction upon the respondent No. 3 to pay the cost awarded in some other case from his own pocket. In other words mainly the petitioner, is challenging the policies of admission and transfer of the Kendriya Vidyalayas.

(2.) UNDER Clause 3 of the said guidelines, priorities in admission has been fixed. Under Clause 3 (a)(vii), 'children from any other category ' can be admitted if the seats are vacant after fulfilling the higher priorities i.e. from i to vi.

(3.) IN reply, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has not made necessary averments in support of his first grievance. It is stated and submitted in a vague and general manner, with reference to Annexure 7 that 80 students have been admitted in class XI in Kendriya Vidyalaya, Hinoo, Ranchi out of which 23 seats have been filled up by the students of other Kendriya Vidyalayas although they secured less marks then other students of other schools. He further submitted that there is nothing on the record to support the said allegation made on behalf of the petitioner, and it is not stated as to who were the said students from the general 3 (a)(vii) category, being more meritorious than the students of other Kendriya Vidyalayas who were refused admission. He further submitted that this Court is not required to go into this debate in the absence of the founda -tional facts he also submitted that from the said Annexure -7 itself it will appear that 23 students who secured more than 80% marks were admitted over and above the class strength. As per the policy of Kendriya Vidyalaya, a discretion has been given to the principal to take admission of a student in Class XI over and above the class strength, irrespective of the category to which he belongs, if he has secured 80% or more marks in class X examination. He pointed out that nothing has been said in this case that any student from the general category i.e. category 3(a)(vii) having secured 80% or more marks in class X examination has been denied admission in preference to the students coming from other Kendriya Vidyalayas, having less marks. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the Annexures in this writ petition contains a list of about 170 students falling under the priority III, V & VI categories, who could not be accommodated due to non -availability of seats in class XI during the academic session 2000 -01. This itself shows that mere was no scope for accommodation of any student from general category.