Delhi High Court
Tanuj Bhatia (Minor) vs Appejay School Pitampura, Delhi & ... on 28 July, 2016
$~67
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 28.07.2016
+ W.P.(C) 4198/2016 & CM No. 17733/2016
TANUJ BHATIA (MINOR) ..... Petitioner
versus
APPEJAY SCHOOL PITAMPURA,
DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :Mr R.K. Saini and Mr. Shubhankar Sengupta, Advocates
For the Respondents : Ms. Yashmeet Kaur, Adv. for R-1
Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC with Ms. Niti Jain, Adv. for
GNCTD/R-2
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of letter
dated 12.04.2016 whereby the admission of the petitioner has been
cancelled and name of the petitioner has been struck off from the rolls of
the school on the ground that income certificate furnished at the time of
seeking admission was fake and forged.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the income of the
parents of the petitioner is less than Rs. One lakh per annum which is
below the prescribed limit for the Economically Weaker Section (EWS)
category. Fresh certificate dated 15.06.2016 has been filed along with the
petition. The respondent no. 2 was directed to verify the correctness of
the certificate. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 submits that the
income certificate has been verified and has been issued by the Tehsildar,
Rohini, Delhi. Copy of the income certificate has been produced and the
same is taken on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on various judgments
passed by this Court in similar circumstances whereby the school
authorities were directed not to cancel the admission of the minor child
on the ground of misdeeds of the father of the child. Learned counsel for
the respondent school states that the seats in EWS category are still
available. One such Judgment relied upon is dated 22.03.2016 in W.P.(C)
2219/2016, titled as 'Master Jai Raikwar & Ors. Vs. The Heritage
School & Ors.'.
4. As the issue involves the education of a minor and the minor falls
in the eligible category and an income certificate certifying the said fact
has been furnished and no fault can be attributed to the minor, in the facts
of the case, a lenient view is required to be taken. It is thus directed that
the admission of the petitioner be restored and not cancelled, subject to
deposit of a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- by the father of the petitioner with the
Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital, Delhi within two weeks. The hospital
shall utilize the amount for providing treatment to the persons falling
under the EWS category.
5. The petitioner shall also be entitled to all the benefits/entitlements
under the said category. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in
the above terms.
6. It is clarified that if the new income certificate furnished by the
petitioner is found to be fictitious or not correct on any account, it shall
be open to the respondents to cancel the admission of the petitioner in
accordance with law and no special equity shall be claimed by the
petitioner by virtue of the present order.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of earlier
admission, the date of birth of the petitioner was incorrectly mentioned as
24.06.2011, whereas the correct date of birth of the petitioner is
24.02.2011. Copy of the birth certificate has been annexed with the
petition as Annexure-P1. Original of the same has been produced in
Court.
8. The petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the school
and the concerned authorities for correction/rectification of the date of
birth of the petitioner. On such representation being made by the
petitioner, the school/authorities shall dispose of the same in accordance
with law.
Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 28, 2016
'rs'
