The Allahabad High Court has observed that grievance relating to the admission in an education institution should be redressed with promptness and as it violate Fundamental Right to Education enshrined under Article 21-A of Constitution if they remain unattended.
The Division Bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi was adjudicating upon a Special Appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules challenging rejection of their writ petition by the single-judge bench.
Brief Facts of the Case
The son of the petitioner appeared in the entrance test held for the admission as Resident Scholar in the educational institution in question for taking admission in Class-VIII. He cleared the test but due to some compelling circumstances i.e. serious illness of the mother of the candidate and his father being out of town for the purposes of service, the student could not get admission in Class-VIII as Resident Scholar, therefore, an application was preferred by the father of the candidate to the Principal of the Institution that instead of treating his son as a Resident Scholar, he may be given admission as Day Scholar as he is ready to complete all required formalities including the fees.
He went on to make few more requests but all remain unattended. The Counsel has submitted that the father of the candidate was informed about the fate of the admission of his son late, pursuant to which writ petition was filed.
The said writ petition of the appellant/writ petitioner has been dismissed on the ground that the said writ petition is not maintainable for the reason that the issue of the same institution has already been set at rest by Apex Court wherein it was held that the institution being an unaided minority private institution, therefore, the writ petition against such institution may not be entertained.
Learned Single Judge vide impugned order considered aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court as well as some more judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and came to the conclusion that since a writ petition against La Martiniere College, Lucknow is not maintainable, therefore, the reliefs prayed in the writ petition may not be granted and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
High Court's Observation
The Court noted that the Cousnel for the petitioner was not able to show any case law to the effect that in spite of the facts, circumstances and legal position so discussed above grievance of the appellant may be redressed by invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court.
The Court agreed with the single-judge bench's view and since no proper reply or case law was cited to convince the Court that the prayers of the writ petition could be allowed, it dismissed the same.
However, before parting, the Court observed that if the admission of the student-appellant Tanishk Srivastava for ClassVIII for that he was admittedly qualified was not possible as Day Scholar student as he had qualified such entrance examination for Resident Scholar, at least specific information to this effect must be provided to the parents of such student at the earliest so that appropriate steps could be taken by the parents of such student.
It mentioned that it is a trite law that where there is no statutory prescription to redress the grievance of any aggrieved, the equitable principles would be applied inasmuch as no one should be left remediless.
"This is not a case where the student has not qualified the entrance examination for getting admission in particular class i.e. Class-VIII but this is a case where such student has qualified such entrance examination as Resident Scholar but due to compelling and unavoidable circumstances he could not be able to get admission as Resident Scholar. Therefore, in such compelling circumstances, at least on the basis of principles of equity, it was bare minimum required on the part of the Principal of the institution to apprise the parents of the student that the institution would be unable to provide admission to their ward in Class-VIII as a Day Scholar student."
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments