Delhi High Court
Birender Singh vs Union Of India & Ors on 11 December, 2013
Author: V. K. Jain
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 11.12.2013
+ WP(C) No.7836 of 2013 & CM No.16639 of 2013 (Stay)
BIRENDER SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. P. Aanand Naidu, Mr. Rabin
Majumdar & Mr. D.K. Pradhan, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajeeve Mehra, ASG with
Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, CGSC,
Ms. Shruti Aggarwal & Mr. Rupender
Pal Singh, Advs. along with Major
Dhar, Ministry of Defence.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN
JUDGEMENT
V.K.JAIN, J. (Oral)
The son of the petitioner, namely, Harsh Yadav, is studying in
Class V in a Central School and his date of birth is 21.4.2003.
According to the petitioner, his son is quite keen to join Rashtriya
Military School (for short „RMS‟) so that he can enter Armed Forces
through National Defence Academy (NDA) and has been making
preparations for the entrance examination held by RMS for admission to
the VI standard. Till the academic year 2013-2014, the children in the
age bracket 10-12 years as on 1st July of the year of admission were
eligible for taking admission to the RMS. However, for the academic
year 2014-2015, only the children in the age group of 10-11 years as on
1.7.2014 are eligible for admission to the said schools. Since under the
new eligibility norms, the son of the petitioner is not eligible for taking
admission to RMS, his application to appear in the entrance examination
has been rejected. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court
with the following prayers:
"a. Quash the arbitrary and illegal order fixing the eligibility
in terms of age bracket from 10-12 years to 10-11 years with
the cut off date taken as 01.07.2014 at entry for admission to
class 6 in Rashtriya Military Schools.
b. Direct the respondents to follow the age guidelines as
prescribed by the Ganguly Committee award.
c. Quash the impugned Reject List of candidates as
declared on the official website of the Rashtriya Military
School for entrance examination to be conducted on
15.12.2013.
d. Direct the respondents to issue Admit Card allow the
son of the petitioner so as to enable him to appear in the
entrance examination scheduled for 15.12.2013."
2. The learned Additional Solicitor General, who appears on
advance notice, has placed on record a copy of the Minutes of the 19th
meeting of the Central Governing Council for RMS held on 24.8.2011.
To the extent it is relevant the said minutes read as under:
"ITEM 2 Reduction in age bracket of candidates during
intake in Class VI
9. Proposal. It was proposed to reduce the age bracket
of candidates at Induction Stage in class VI from 10-12 years
to 10-11 years to bring them at par with Sainik Schools.
10. Justification.
(a) Present age bracket for new entrants in Class VI in RMS
is 10-12 years where as it is 10-11 in Sainik Schools.
(b) Due to this students of RMS get two chances less to
appear in UPSC NDA exam as compared to Sainik School
counterpart.
(c) The revised age bracket will provide additional two
chances as in Sainik Schools."
3. It would, thus, be seen that the age criteria for admission to RMS
was changed so as to bring the same in line with the criteria adopted for
admission to Sainik Schools. It would be pertinent to note here that the
students of RMS as well as students of Sainik Schools are eligible to
appear in the NDA examinations. Since it was found that on account of
the age bracket for admission to RMS being 10-12 years, the students
were getting only one chance to appear in NDA examinations whereas
the students of Sainik Schools, on account of their age criteria being 10-
11 years were getting two such chances. The modification in the age
criteria, therefore, was made only with a view to bring the students of
RMS at par with the students of Sainik Schools so that they are also able
to get two chances for the examination conducted by UPSC for NDA.
4. As regards the cut off date to determine the eligibility in the
matter of age, the learned Additional Solicitor General submits that the
cut off date has all over been 1st July and the same is in line with the cut
off date of NDA which are January and July each year.
5. It is also pointed out by the learned Additional Solicitor General
that the decision taken by the Central Governing Council on 24.8.2011
was conveyed to the Chief of Army Staff vide communication dated
10.4.2013 and even the advertisement stipulating the revised age criteria
was published in the newspapers in July, 2013.
6. It is by now settled legal proposition that as far as policy matters
are concerned, the Court would normally not interfere with the decision
taken by the State unless the decision so taken is shown to be wholly
arbitrary, perverse, illegal or unreasonable.
In Asif Hameed and Others v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and
Ors. AIR 1989 SC 1899, the Apex Court, inter alia, held as under:-
"When a State action is challenged, the function of the court is
to examine the action in accordance with law and to determine
whether the legislature or the executive has acted within the
powers and functions assigned under the Constitution and if
not, the court must strike-down the action. While doing so the
court must remain within its self-imposed limits. The court sits
in judgment on the action of a coordinate branch of the
Government. While exercising power of judicial review of
administrative action, the court is not an appellate authority.
The Constitution does not permit the court to direct or advise
the executive in matters of policy or to sermonize qua any
matter which under the Constitution lies within the sphere of
legislature or executive, provided these authorities do not
transgress their constitutional limits or statutory powers.
In Ekta Shakti Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi AIR 2006
SC 2609, the following view was taken by the Apex Court:-
"The policy decision must be left to the Government as it alone
can adopt which policy should be adopted after considering all
the points from different angles. In matter of policy decisions or
exercise of discretion by the Government so long as the
infringement of fundamental right is not shown Courts will
have no occasion to interfere and the Court will not and should
not substitute its own judgment for the judgment of the
executive in such matters. In assessing the propriety of a
decision of the Government the Court cannot interfere even if a
second view is possible from that of the Government."
7. In the present case there is no illegality in revising the age bracket
since, the age criteria is not statutorily prescribed anywhere.
Considering the rationale behind the change in the criteria, the decision
taken by the Central Governing Council to change the age criteria which
is in the larger interest of the students taking admission in RMS, cannot
be said to be arbitrary, irrational or illegal, so as to call for interference
by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
The writ petition is dismissed. No orders as to costs.
DECEMBER 11, 2013 V.K. JAIN, J.
b'nesh
