Delhi High Court
Master Chhayank Through His Father ... vs Directorate Of Education & Anr. on 2 April, 2024
Author: C.Hari Shankar
Bench: C. Hari Shankar
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 4538/2024
MASTER CHHAYANK THROUGH
HIS FATHER SUDHIR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Arkaneil Bhaumik, Mr.
Adhishwar Suri, Mr. Rayadurgam Bharat
and Ms. Suparana Jain, Advs. for Dr. Amit
George, Adv.
versus
DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ANR. .... Respondents
Through: Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Adv. for
Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, SC (C) for
DoE
Ms. Shikha Sharma, Adv. for respondent
school
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
JUDGMENT (O R A L)
% 02.04.2024
W.P.(C) 4538/2024
1. The petitioner, through his father, had applied with the
Directorate of Education (DoE) as a student belonging to the
Disadvantaged Group (DG) for admission to KG/Pre-primary for the
academic session 2023-2024. A computerized draw of lots was
conducted by the DoE. The petitioner was found entitled to be
admitted to KG/Pre-primary for the academic session 2023-2024 in
the Respondent 2 school.
2. As the respondent school refused to admit the petitioner, the
present writ petition has been instituted seeking a mandamus to
Respondent 2 school to admit the petitioner.
3. However, the petition has come up for hearing after the 2023-
2024 academic session has come to an end.
4. Mr. Bhaumik, learned Counsel for the petitioner prays that,
though it may not be possible to grant the relief sought in the petition
as the 2023-2024 academic session has come to an end, the Court
should direct the DoE to make every endeavour to ensure that the
petitioner is granted admission as a DG student in Class I in some
other school. He cites, for this purpose, the judgment of this Bench in
Jiya v. Maharaja Agrasen Model School1.
5. Though it is true that, in one or two cases, this Bench has
passed such orders, this cannot be made a rule. If the Court is to
routinely pass orders directing the DoE to adjust the petitioner for the
next academic session in some other school, they would end up
blocking the chances of others who may have made similar
applications under the DG category for Class I for the next academic
year.
6. This would ultimately be prejudicial to the interest of others and
cannot, therefore, be the outcome of the order passed by this Court.
7. For the next (2024-2025) academic year, in Class I, the right of
the petitioner would only be to consideration of his case at par with
other DG aspirants who seek admission for the 2024-2025 academic
session; in the draw of lots to be conducted by the DoE in that regard.
8. Needless to say, the petitioner would be at liberty to apply as a
DG candidate for admission to Class I for the 2024-2025 academic
session and, if such application is made, the DoE would endeavour to
secure admission to the petitioner, needless to say, after following the
procedure prescribed in that regard.
9. This petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
CM APPL.18605/2024 and CM APPL.18606/2024
10. These applications do not survive for consideration and stand
disposed of.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
APRIL 2, 2024
rb
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
2024 SCC OnLine Del 2126
Digitally Signed By:AJIT
Signing Date:03.04.2024
17:08:39
