Leena Alok Dwivedi vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 3114 Guj

              C/SCA/13339/2020                               ORDER



               IN THEHIGHCOURTOF GUJARATAT AHMEDABAD

                R/SPECIALCIVILAPPLICATIONNO. 13339of 2020
==========================================================
                                 LEENAALOKDWIVEDI
                                       Versus
                                   UNIONOF INDIA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MRR G DWIVEDI(6601)for the Petitioner(s)No. 1
MS.NIDHIVYAS,AGP(99) for the Respondent(s)No. 3
MRPY DIVYESHVAR(2482)for the Respondent(s)No. 1,3
NOTICESERVED(4)for the Respondent(s)No. 2
==========================================================
 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                                   Date: 23/02/2021

                                    ORALORDER

1. Heard Dr.R.G.Dwivedi learned advocate for the petitioner.

2. The prayers in the petition read as under:

"(A) That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction for granting admission to Master Yuvaan Alok Dwivedi in Class 1 in any Kendriya Vidyalaya situated in Vadodara preferably in Kendriya Vidyalaya No.3, AFS, Makarpura, Vadodara.

(B) The Hon'ble Court as an interim relief may be pleased to grant provisional admission in Kendriya Vidyalaya to the son of Petitioner namely Master Yuvaan Alok Dwivedi till final disposal of this petition to safeguard the future of a ward and his invaluable academic year, otherwise he would suffer irreparable loss."

3. The petition was subsequently amended and the amended

prayer reads as under:

(E) Or alternatively by applying principle of Prospective

C/SCA/13339/2020 ORDER

Overrulling Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare Special dispensation Scheme ­ HRM Quota illegal/unconstitutional."

4. The crux of the petitioner's grievance is that her son is eligible

for admission in Standard­1 in Kendriya Vidhyalaya. By

virtue of the petitioner serving in public sector bank, she

claims that she is entitled to be preferred as a parent for

securing admission of her ward in the Kendriya Vidhyalaya

under the priority as envisaged under the guidelines for

admission in the Kendriya Vidhyalayas.

5. Admittedly even according to the petitioner, the ward of the

petitioner was wait­listed in the preferential quota in the

following schools:

Preference 3 ­ KV No.1 Harni Road Vadodara ­ W/L 161"

6. Knowing that the petitioner would not be entitled to seek

admission for her ward due to the wait­list, alternative prayer

was to grant admission under the discretionary quota of

HRM. Hence, the amendment as per prayer 11E is sought

for.

C/SCA/13339/2020 ORDER

7. Dr.Dwivedi would cite a decision of the Bombay High Court

in case of Joint Action Committee of Kendriya Vidayalaya

Employees Association And Anr. v. Union of India and Anr.

reported in 1998 SCC OnLine Del 812, wherein, the scheme

was struck down being violative of Article 14. However, the

same would counter the argument of the petitioner himself

that if he wants the benefit of the scheme for which the

judgment was cited, the same argument does not merit

attention from this Court.

8. Such a prayer cannot be granted in exercise of powers under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the petition is

dismissed particularly when the HRM quota is a discretionary

quota.

9. The petition is accordingly dismissed. It shall however be

open for the petitioner to seek admission in the respondent

school for the next academic year under the discretionary

quota, if so advised.

(BIRENVAISHNAV,J) ANKITSHAH