Delhi High Court
Dyansh Through His Mother Reena vs Directorate Of Education & Anr. on 22 March, 2024
Author: C. Hari Shankar
Bench: C. Hari Shankar
$~19 & 20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 9394/2023
BABY DIVANSH ARORA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Prerna Tandon, Adv. for
Mr. V.K. Tandon, Adv.
versus
TECNIA INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. R.M. Sinha and Mr. P.M.
Sinha, Advs. for R-1
Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Ms. Prasansha Sharma,
and Ms. Nikita Vir, Advs. for Mr. Santosh
Kumar Tripathi, SC (Civil) for DOE/R-2
+ W.P.(C) 12838/2023, CM APPL. 50568/2023 and 54539/2023
DYANSH THROUGH HIS MOTHER REENA .... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Arkenil Bhaumik and Mr.
Adhishwar Suri, Advs. for Mr. Amit George,
Adv
versus
DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ANR ...... Respondents
Through: Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Ms.
Prasansha Sharma, and Ms. Nikita Vir,
Advs. for Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, SC
(Civil) for DOE/R-1
Mr. R.M. Sinha and Mr. P.M. Sinha, Advs.
for R-2
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:AJIT
W.P.(C) 9394/2023 & W.P.(C) 12838/2023 Page 1 of 5
KUMAR
Signing Date:01.04.2024
19:05:39
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
J U D G M E N T (O R A L)
% 22.03.2024
1. In both these writ petitions, the petitioners are children who
seek admission to the entry level class in schools to which, as per the
outcome of computerised draw of lots conducted by the Directorate of
Education (DoE), the petitioners have been allotted admission.
2. During the pendency of these petitions, the petitioners have
been granted provisional admission to the said entry level class. The
entry level class in WP (C) 9394/2023 is Class I whereas the entry
level class in WP(C) 12838/2023 is KG/Pre-primary.
3. Inasmuch as the schools to which, as per the computerised draw
of lots conducted by the DoE, the petitioners were granted admission,
refused to admit the petitioners, they have approached this Court by
means of the present writ petition, seeking a mandamus to the school
to admit them in accordance with the outcome of the computerised
draw of lots conducted by the DoE.
4. This Court has, in a number of cases, held that where
(i) a child applies to the DoE for admission to an entry level
class as an EWS/DG category student,
(ii) the DoE, on the basis of the data provided by the schools,
works out the number of general category and EWS/DG seats
available in the entry level class in the schools,
(iii) the said data is uploaded by the DoE on its website,
informing the schools to represent in the event of any
discrepancy in the data within a stipulated time period, normally
of five to ten days,
(iv) the school does not represent within the said period and
(v) the computerised draw of lots is thereafter held by the
DoE,
the outcome of the computerised draw of lots would be binding on all
schools which did not file any representation in response to the data
uploaded by the DoE within the time granted in that regard. Children
who are found entitled to admission to the entry level class in such
schools have mandatorily to be granted admission.
5. A detailed judgment in this regard is to be found in the decision
of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Rameshwar Jha v.
Principal, Richmond Global School1.
6. In both these cases, the respondent school is the same.
7. The petitioner Divansh Arora in WP (C) 9394/2023 belongs to
the EWS whereas the petitioner Dyansh in WP (C) 12838/2023
belongs to the Disadvantaged Group (DG).
8. For the purposes of entitlement to preferential admission in
entry level class in school, EWS and DG students stand on the same
footing.
9. Both petitioners had applied to the DoE for admission to entry
level classes in the respondent-school for the academic year 2023-24.
Divansh Arora's application was for Class 1 whereas Dyansh's
application was for KG/Pre-primary.
10. The respondent-school admittedly did not represent to the DoE
within the time stipulated in that regard after the data regarding the
number of the general category and EWS/DG category seats in the
school was uploaded by the DoE. Consequently, the computerised
draw of lots was conducted and Divansh Arora was found to
admission in class I and Dyansh was found entitled to admission in
class KG/pre-primary.
11. As already noted, the respondent-school having refused to give
admission to the petitioners, they have approached this Court seeking
a writ of mandamus.
12. No other arguments were advanced by learned Counsel for the
parties in the present matters.
13. As such, the case in question being covered by earlier decisions
passed by this Court as well as by the judgment in Rameshwar Jha,
these petitions are bound to succeed.
14. The provisional admission granted to the petitioners to the entry
level class in the respondent-school are regularised. The petitioners
shall be entitled to be imparted education as EWS/DG category
1 (2022) SCC OnLine Del 4438
students and would be entitled to all facilities to which such students
are entitled.
15. The writ petitions stand allowed in the aforesaid terms, with no
orders as to costs.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
MARCH 22, 2024
dsn
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
