Uday Kiran Suri v. University of Delhi and Ors

rN THE HIGH COURT OJ1' DELHP AT NEW Df1:LIIJ \M.P.(C) 5478/2012 & CM.lll74/20L? U:DA Y lORAN SURI Through: versus (h-r,tcd 15.10.2012 ..... Pr2tj i.i oncr Mr Mani ::h (;,:: n :.±hi, 1\dvocatc ·"), , , ._J • \.. 1 . J .• " I . cJ •.•.•• "'-. y L:- ' ·. Through: lYrr.M.J.S. /\dvocatc for D.U. Mr.Pawa'l KuF1a.r hgarwal, Adv. Cor R:,<: !!:. ''r)nc;J:tUtl.()rJ t'ndi•t' "r·r'l7 1.11'- ·1·\:rJ·; .')"(!(·" ('·!· ;J.l 1i·,,,. .. :, .... ... / f... k ll'-· ""'.l ...._ - I. l ·-' (, -.) .'\. l: u - ' .. I 'L!- ... ..., \, - J .1. ....__ l . . . I I . - 'T"ando.rnus di 1-ccting respondent nc .2 V:O' k:':'.'.: to admit the pcLi\.ionu 'JJ ._ . . Junior Nai.io,1al Lvcl playe:- cC ·--·r:.:. As per Lhc pc(Lic:JC'"., LJ r..olicy and, thus, he is an digibk ·.·an.ci; c aLe for ·:he purpose · •'')n"'J.,l,··-'"J i-·o·· ad.ITI.l'."l,C'D l!Jldcr •i1·' ., -' n' 10ta 1.11 ·>cc·'•r·J· 'lt•cc '·A.; L>c _,, , ,::-:, . ,. · ',. U l L . ,)., J l. .. -· ..1<1. l-> -, c Ci .L- <. • - -- ... - ------···------------------- guidelines laid down by respondents no. I and 4. Counsel for u:.: petitioner submits that respondents no.::?. and 3 conducted sports trial Cr the admission of candidates undc:· spo;i:; quota, for which the pctitio:1c'· participated. Respondent no.2 dc::::]arcd the list of candidates n accordance the result of thc :·csJKC. ·,re spmis trials along with _i· c waiting list for the admissions. The pcLitioncr was informed that r1c l-:ad secured third rank in the sports trial ann there were only 2 scats rcscn ::c under sports quota (squash) in July, :201 Bot!1 the candidates ranks 1 and 2 were admitteci cO respondent no.2, coilcgc. Subs::quently, the candidate holdjilg Tan], no.::?. withdrew his adn1iss;.: 1 Cram the respondent no.2, college on l 8. 7.2012 and, thus, the petit.i:;r (r digiblc for admission on a vacar:cy being created, as a resuh .1r withdrawal of the second rank holder. T:1c petitioner waited till the 2-::;t date of admissions but respondent no.:: ::c:Jcgc did not dccla:·c any oth >. list exec·:::< the first list for adrn;ssion squash sports quo:.C\. . , ·- next eligible candidate-for admi;;siuc1 :t·. s::.Juash category under quota, as one scat had beeP c.11 withdrawal by :Jr : ·: SL'Cccssful candidate who had earlier bcc1 (;ilcrcd admission. Respcndc:-: rc Cuscd to admit the petitioner, V/ ,'1 bas forced the knock the door of this Court for justice. Counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the request made by J-:1_ pci.iiioncr the scat was not offered 1"o him. His further pointed out tbaL rc list was prepared. fun.1c.::- submits tbat on 2S .Cl7 .2C; iatbcr ofthc petitioner made an app!icaticn d:1dcr the :Right to Informati. :.1 Act i.o respondent no.4. The petitioner also served a notice on 27.07.20 J to the Central Grievance Committee of Respondent no.2. In reply to the R'i'} /\pnlir.:ation, no.2 admitted ·hat one scat had been vaca.kc.:: ' ' -·-··-- ----- .. .. ------------------ ( l-- L/ d - d I h n h () ,..., Q QO '\; ') by the candidate a nntte unocr tHe ::;quas quota. n . c, _ _,_, l_ petitioner sent a legal notice to the respondent no.2 in response ;"o -:::: 1 respondent no.2 vide email dated 21.08.2012 replied to petitioner :>o; to admit the petitioner. As despite the fact two students under the sports quota had withdrawn their adr1ission with respondent no.2 c·s.::c and thereafter on 31.08.2012 the present writ petition was filed.

¶4Counsel for the petitioner submits th<::t the petitioner was successful Jc trials and his name finds mcnticmcd c:.t serial no.l in the; waiting lis-c. both the candidates who were granted admission withdrc\i\ - l-n. _!_'.....;._. adtTl<issions, the petitioner shou1d ha·;c automatically been offeree, :. It is submitted that the action of the is arbitrary and ilkg:, _ Tbc present petition is opposed by cmins . .::l for the respondent, uni'-· .:;-:-:· _\ _ Mr.Rupal submits that the writ petition lY:?cs been filed on the las;. • ' closing of admissions. It is :fu;:thcr s:.tbrnitted thal the seats the sports quota (Extra Activities 1\dmi::-;sicn : r_ supernumerary scats and not_ p<Ft :l:e reg,ular quota seals, 1_h .:> r_ netitioncr has no vested ri2.ht 'CJr of a scat under ,he ' over and above regular

¶6l1 is further contended that lhc: s-:_udcnts, who have been grar1tcc-s :.:a;," under the sports quota, withdrc';J th2ir admission on ( ll.08.20 12 and the sports comrnittr:;c closed the admission and i:c ::-- i. wisdom decided not to admit any l'ur.hcr students after 09.07.201 =. · ]·,: attention oCthe COUrt is also drawn t::; lbc prospectus, which makes :L Cl ;· that the college may admit a few sUdents not exceeding 5% e-n <;·- of performance in music, dance, drama, debates and other sud-: act i:_;c3.

¶7Mr.!\ggarwal, counsel for respondems no.2 and 3 submits that candidates arc also included in e list of Extra Curricu!c.x I I Admission and also there is special category of sports admission, ;<' l :: part of the Extra Curricular Activities Admission.

¶8It is submitted that inegularity bas no"". been committed by the co!kg.:: 1r the college has acted in any illcgaj manner. Mr.Rupal, ::ounscl -r tr.:: University further submits that afLcr 31.08.2012, no admissior ,,_; granted to any student, and there is no irregularity on the par1 college in not offering a scat to the petitioner on account of the fa:.:. !-_:::._t spmis quota scats belong to quota and not in the r:.:...?.JlJr quota. Sl. I bavc heard learned counsel !(Jr the parties, considered :· \ contentions, and also perused the :Jlcadings and the anncx'...n-cs . 1 -i record. Admittedly, two candidates, namely, Aditya Advani aw.: \;;:;; Jain both holding rank 1 and 2 respectively were granted admissio:- c; :..1c stipulated date 05.07.2012 with the respondent no.2 college .. It that afle: the closure of admissions on 05.07.2012, a waiting, .i:-:1 ;, :,s p:·eparcd and notified on 06.07.::'.0 12 kn-admissions till 09JJ7.2fi , c' up the v:::1cant seats under the I ECJ\ quota and after \ivhi::: 1 :.:c admission committee dccidcci no!. make any further admissic:·_c ITc:.:r ,..spons I 1 quota. Further it is after closure of admissic·:l,-; candidates holding rank 1 and 2, 'Nho were admitted fer the _c;::cr _., squash under sports I ECA quote:!., withdrew their admissions .n \ 1r;

18.07.2012 and 11.08.2011 :.c., after the college admission iiL:c ciccidcd not to make any further ae:nissions under the sports, ; :c 1 ·_ u:Y.<l. Having regard to the fact that th;: scats offered under the tc, (Extra Curricular Activities Admi5sion) arc supernumerary scats ::- :r;_ pa1i of the regular quota scats, Lhus the petitioner has no vested grant of a scat under the Sports quota, over and above the a:- students. It may also be noticed that no waiting list in the cas.: c - t-c WP(C)54 78-2012 (' ----;, sports I ECA quota was prepared after the closure or aamlSS ' ;

05.07.2012, so it was not possible Ccr the respondent college tc o · :_o the petitionct or to any other students. The court cannot also ,,·c..:k of the fact that the petitioner has ar:proached this court on 30.08." . 2 the last date for admission was or 31.08.2012, which sta:-1ds c:1cs: may also be noticed that the petitioner has been grantee! ,,., another college. Therefore, I find no merit in the submissions n:acL _ ·c petitioner. No grounds made out lo ente1iain the prcscm Accordingly, the petition and lhc apj.':lication stand dismissed. - ( '-7 .... _ l OCTOBER 15, 2012 Wi1(C)S4 7 g-7.0 J 2 " t''-\;, .