Master Vansh Throuh Father Ravinder Kumar v. Venkateshwar Global School & Ors

JUDGMENT V.KAMESWAR

RAO, J. Fororders,seeW.P.(C)No.7945/2016.. ^ V; KAMESWAR RAO, J MARCH 31,2017/ak IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judsment deliveredon: March 31, 2017 + W.P.(C)7945/2016&CMs 7936/2017,32976/2016 NEERAJKUMAR Petitioner Through: Mr. N.K.Upadhyay,Adv. versus VENKATESHWARGLOBALSCHOOLAND ORS Respondents Through: Mr.SanjoyGhose,Ms.PratishthaVij, Mr.Rhishabh Jetley, Advs. for R-2-4 + W.P.(C)9069/2016, CM No. 36734/2016 MASTER VANSH THROUGH FATHER RAVINDER KUMAR Petitioner Through: Mr.K.B.Jha,Adv. versus VENKATESHWAR GLOBAL SCHOOL & ORS Respondents Through: Mr.O.S.Soran, Adv. for R-1-2 Mr.Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.S.Banerji, Adv. GNCTD along with Mr.Shyam Behari, LA, Zone- + W.P.(C) 9144/2016, CM No. 36997/2016 MASTER DEVANSH AHUJA THR MOTHER BHARTI AHUJA Petitioner Through: Mr.K.B.Jha, Adv. versus W.P.fC) 7945/2016 Page I of36 VENKATESHWAR GLOBAL SCHOOL & ORS Respondents Through: Mr.O.S.Soran, Adv. for R-1-2 Mr.Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.S.Banerji, Adv. GNCTD along with Mr.Shyam Behari, LA, Zone- + W.P.(C) 10361/2016 & CMS 40720/2016, 7956/2017 MUKESH KUMAR Petitioner Through: Mr.N.K.Upadhyay, Adv. versus VENKATESHWAR GLOBAL SCHOOL & ORS. Respondents Through: Mr.Prashant Sivarajan, Adv. for Mr.Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for R-1-2 + W.P.(C) 10675/2016, CMNos. 41829/2016 & 8667/2017 RAVI KUMAR Petitioner Through: Mr.Narendra Kumar Upadhyay, Ms.Juhi, Advs. versus G D GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS Respondents Through: Mr.Peeyosh Kalra, ASC with Mr.Shiva Sharma, Ms.Sona Babbar, Advs. for DOE (GNCTD). Ms.Vijaya Singh, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT IV.P.fC) 7945/2016 Page 2 of36 V. KAMESWAR RAO. J

¶1Vide the present order, I shall dispose of five writ petitions being W.P.(C) 7945/2016, W.P.(C) 9069/2016, W.P.(C) 9144/2016, W.P.(C) 10361/2016 and W.P.(C) 10675/2016 as they involve common issue. The substantive prayer sought in all the writ petitions is that a direction be issued to the respondents to give admission to the linor petitioners/wards of the petitioners for the academic session 2016-2017. As the facts in each of the writ petition are at variance, I intend to narrate the facts of each writ petition and the stand of the respondents in their pleadings. Writ Petition (Civil) No. 7945/2016

¶2It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent No.l had in the month of March 2016 displayed the vacancies for admission under EWS/Freeship category on public domain i.e the website of the Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi. On the sis of the said vacancies,the petitionersubmittedan applicationto the office of the respondent No.l for the admission of his ward Avish Rana in Class 1®^ in the session 2016-2017. In April, 2016 the petitionervisited the office of the respondentNo.l and he was given some forms. The petitionerfilledup the forms and also paid the requisite fee but no receiptwas givento the petitionerand this aspect has been informedto the officeofthe respondentNo.2. Afterwaitingfor three weeks,the petitionerapproached respondentNo.l when he was told that his applicationalong with the papers are being sentto the relevantCommitteeof respondentNo.l Schoolfor approval,whichmay take Page3of36 some days. The petitioner approached the respondent No.2 as well as the respondent No. 1 but no response was given.

¶3It is the case of the petitioner, he was informed by the officer of the respondent No.l in the month of July 2016 that the respondent No.l is not allotted/providedwith land by DDA or any other Government agency, so the respondent No.l is not sponsible for admission under EWS/DG/Freeshipcategory. The petitioner's case is thathe suspectsthat the respondentNo.1has allottedseats in a non-transparentmanner, which raise serious doubt over the admissionprocess of the School. Just like the vacancies are being displayed in public domain on the website of the Directorate of Educationi.e respondentNo.3, in the same manner the finally selectedlist of wards, financial and social status of the parents of the wards and the admissioncriteriamust also be displayedon the websiteofthe respondentNo.3. It is the case ofthe petitioner it the issue of admission under EWS/DG/Freeshipcategory is already a decided matter by this Court vide judgment dated November 24, 2014 in fF.P.fCJ No. 4607/2013in the caseofJusticefor Allv. Govt. ofNCTofDelhiandAnother.

¶4The respondentNo.l School has filed a counter-affidavit,wherein it has been statedthat the vacantseat for the admissionunder EWS/Freeshipcategorywas put on public domain on the websiteof the Directorateof Educationin the month of March, 2016. It is deniedthatthe petitionersubmittedan applicationin its officefor admission ofhis ward in ClassI for the session2016-2017underthe EWS/Freeshipcategory. It is Page4of36 also stated that the ward of the petitioneris not entitledto admissionconsideringthe fact thatthe distanceof the house of the petitioneris more than 6 km whereasas per the guidelinesof the respondentNo.2 of neighbourhoodcriteria,the child/wardresiding within the parameterof 6 km is to be admitted first. It is stated that in terms of the categorization EWS/DG students residing within 0-1 km shall be admitted first, condly those residing within 1-3 km, thirdly those residing 3-6 kms and lastly students residing beyond 6 kms shall be admitted only in case vacancies remain unfilled even after considering all students within six kms area. It is their case, the School has represented that the distance of the petitioner's house is more than 10 kms from the School, hence, the question of the admission of the petitioner does not arise since the School was already having nine applications for admission under the EWS category against four vacancies in Class-I and out of them, five applicants are claiming to be ;iding within the parameter of the guidelines i.e 6 kms.

¶5• It is averred by the respondent No.l School that it has taken up the matter with the respondentNo.2 for furtherissuanceof directionon the subjectmatterto respondent No.l vide letter dated May 2, 2016 and the respondentNo.2 has categoricallyissued a letter dated May 25, 2016 that the applications for admission in Class I are to be submitted through online only whereas many applications are forwarded to School throughdrop box/post. It is also statedthat respondentNo.l vide its letterdated May 31, 2016 forwardedall the detailsof the applicationsunderEWS category,whichwere ' Page5 of36 receivedagainstthesevacantseats in Pre-Primary(KG) and ClassIbut the respondent No.2 neither replied nor issued any guidelines. The School has denied that the petitionerhas visitedthe School in the month of April, 2016. The Schoolhas denied thatthe admissionhas beendone in anon-transparentmanner. It is alsothe standofthe Schoolthat as per the guidelines,all suchtype ofvacanciesare to be filledup through spondentNo.2/3 by submittingonline applicationand as per the guidelinesof the respondentNo.2/3 and the saidvacanciesshouldbe filledup and it is the responsibility of the respondentNo.2/3 to issue guidelines. In the absenceof any applicationto the respondentNo.l and the wardofthe petitioneris neitheraneighbourhoodchildnor has followedthe guidelines,is not entitledtothe admission.

¶6Arejoinderto the counter-affidavitfiledby the respondentNo.1has beenfiled.

¶7Respondents2 and 3 have filed a short affidavit. It is stated that in terms of •ovisionsofSection12(l)(c)ofRightofChildrento Free and CompulsoryEducation, Act, 2009 ("RTEAct")all the privateunaidedrecognizedSchoolsare boundto comply witii such notifications/circularsissued by the Directorate of Education regarding admissionunder EconomicallyWeaker Section/DisadvantageGroup Categoryat their respectiveentry level classesPre-School/Nursery,Pre-Primary/KGand Class I and the respondentNo.l VenkateshwarGlobalSchoolbeingin the same categoryofthe School is boundto complysuchnotifications/circulars.It is the standofrespondents2to 3that in orderto ensure a fair opportunityto the childrenbelongingto EWS/DG sectionsof 6of36 society for admissionin said Private Unaided RecognizedSchools (except minority schools)vide circulardated December29, 2015 issuedguidelinesfor admissionunder EWS/DG category at the entry level classes against 25% seats reserved mPrivate Unaided RecognizedSchools of Delhi for the session 2016-2017. For the Private Schoolsrecognizedunder Delhi School EducationAct &Rules, 1973, which includes spondentNo.lA^enkateshwarGlobal Schoolalso, the respondents2and 3deviseda common online module for admissionsunder EWS/DG category at their respective entry level classes for the session2016-2017. Throughthe aforesaidguidelines,the respondents2 and 3 devised a common online registrationform at the respondent departmentwebsitefor admissionunderEWS/DGcategoryin all the concernedPrivate UnaidedSchoolsrecognizedunder the Delhi School EducationAct &Rules, 1973 for the session 2016-2017. All such candidateswho had applied online for EWS/DG ategory as per the circulardated December29, 2015 guidelineswere consideredfor admissionthrough computerizeddraw of lot. The last date of online submissionof applicationfor such admissionsin the said concernedSchoolswas January 22, 2016, which was later extendedupto February5, 2016 vide circulardated January22, 2016 thenuptoFebruary9, 2016videofficeorderdatedFebruary6, 2016. At the initialstage of online admissionprocess,all the concernedSchoolswere requestedto providetheir respectivedetailsonline on the respondents2and 3websiteregardingtheir respective entry level classes and number of EWS/DG categoryvacanciesat the declaredentry Page?of36 level classesof the School. The entry level class declaredby the respondentNo.l for EWS/DG categoryadmissionfor the session2016-2017is Pre-School/Nurserybut did not declareKG/Pre-Primaryand Class I as entry level and accordinglythe respondent No.l showed zero vacancies under EWS/DG category in class KG/Pre-Primaryand Class I for session2016-2017. The guidelinesof the said circularexplicitlystatesthat VS/DG category admission in the entry level classes in the Private Unaided RecognizedSchools can only be done by way of centralizedonline admissionmodule devised by the respondents 2 and 3. The petitioner has not followed the said instructions contained in circular dated December 29, 2015. The respondents 2 and 3 also state that the respondent No.l vide its letter dated June 23, 2016 informed the respondent department that the respondent No.l have vacancies in Class I under EWS/DG category on account of cancellation of EWS/DG category admissions due to :e/forged EWS/DG category certificates and vacancies due to increase in General Category seats at the initial stage of online EWS/DG category admission process, there was no vacancy in the Pre-Primary/KG and Class I of the respondent No.l School. When the vacancy arose later in the academic year, at that point of time, due to non availability of the online application for the Class I, the respondent department could not carry out the online process for filling vacant seats in Class I of the respondent No.l School under EWS/DG category through computerized draw of lots.

¶8The respondents 2 and 3 have stated that it is the responsibility of the School to Page 8 of36 n inform the respondents2 and 3 well in time about the EWS/DG category vacancy positioncorrectlyso thatthe onlineapplicationscouldbe calledagainstthe vacanciesm ClassIofrespondentNo.I School. It is statedthatthe Schoolwhichhave taken fresh admissionunder General Category at various entry levels (Pre-School/Nursery,Pre-Primary/KGand Class-I)and did not declarethe same at the beginnmgof the onlme WSfDG category admission process for the academic session 2016-2017, the respondent Department has taken a policy decision that the EWS/DG category vacanciesin proportionto the General/OpenCategoryadmissionsdone shall be added in respectiveentry levels duringthe next academicsession2017-2018. Vide circular dated December 8, 2016 the respondentDepartmentconveyed the aforesaid policy decisionto all the concernedPrivateUnaidedRecognizedSchooland all the concerned Schools,includingthe respondentNo.l Schoolare boundto complywiththe saidpolicy jcision. The respondentNo.l School by way of representationdated December 15, 2016 declaredthatthe Schoolhas 14 vacanciesinPre-Primary/KGand fourvacantseats in ClassI underEWS/DGcategory. The respondentNo.l Schoolhas requestedto add these vacancies in the online EWS/DG category admission process for the ensuing session2017-2018and the respondents2and 3consideredthe requestofthe respondent No.l School and as per the aforesaid policy decision, decided to carry forward 14 vacanciesofPre-Primary/KGclass in ClassIunderEWS/DGcategoryfor the academic session 2017-2018. The respondents2 and 3 justifiedthe online admissionprocess ^ n beingfair and transparent.It is also statedthatonlinesystemhas savedtime and costof going to various Schools and submittedvarious applicationsand then several further rounds till the admissiontakes place. The computerizeddraw of lots has checked malpracticesto a large extent and has made the monitoring much more effective. Further,the Departmentcannotcontinuewith the processofinvitingfresh applications _Dr the vacanciesarisingduringthe mid academicsessionand that is why the vacancies which are createdin mid academicsessionare carry forwardfor the admissionprocess of ensuingacademicsession. It is statedthat the petitionerhaving neitherappliedfor admissionofhis wardunderEWS/DGcategoryat entryleveldeclaredofthe respondent No.l School within the stipulated time nor did he apply for the same using the appropriatemode i.e onlineportalofthe DirectorateofEducation,the petitionerhaving optedto seek admissionby way ofmanualapplicationin September,2016, no causeof ctionlies againstthe respondents2 and 3and the instantwritpetitionbe dismissed. Writ Petition (Civin 9069/2016

¶9The presentpetitionhas been filed by MasterVansh a minorthroughhis father, seekingadmissionin the respondentNo.l Schoolin KG. It is the case ofthe petitioner thathe belongsto EconomicallyWeakerSectionofthe Societyand the respondentNo.l School is a neighbourhoodSchoolto the petitioner. The Schoolis situatedon the land allotted by the DDA to the Society running the School and also under obligationto admit childrenbelongingto EconomicallyWeaker Sectionupto a maximumextent of W.p.(C) 7945/2016 Page IQ of36 k0.- 25% ofthe strengthofthe School. He wouldreferto the provisionsofSection12(1)(C) ofthe RTE Act, 2009. The DirectorateofEducationhas notifiedadmissionRules for admission under EWS category namely Delhi School Education (Free Seats for Childrenbelongingto EconomicallyWeakerSectionand DisadvantagedGroup)Order, 2011 and notified the manner of admission. All duties imposed on Government now iftedto parentsand children. Now theyhaveto applyfor admissionin the Schooland Schools have to organize draw of lots with priority to students residing in the neighbourhood,which is defined1km underthe Rules of2011. The householdsurvey and identification of children belonging to EWS could take time so it could be an interimarrangementuntil governmentshould completeduty imposedunder Act but it failedevento startthe duty underAct and continuedthe admissionprocessuntilsession 2015-2016 in the same manner. It is the case of the petitioner that on December 29, 15 the respondentNo.l notified guidelinesfor admissionof EWS/DG category at entry level classes in Private Unaided RecognizedSchools of Delhi for the session 2016-2017 and notified the online process of admission in the entry level classes in some of the schoolsincludingthe respondentNo.l Schooland calledfor vacancyin the School. The petitionerwould submitthat the circularis void withoutany authorityin the law and contrary to provisions of Section of RTE Act, 2009 and also contrary to statutory Rules for admission notified by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi. The circular categoricallymentions the closure of admissionprocess by March 31, 2016. In W. p.(C) 7945/2016 Page II of36 > the onHnesystemrespondentNo.l Schoolfilledup the vacancyonly for firstentrylevel class and no vacancy uploaded by respondentSchool for Pre-Primaryclass and no studentapplied for that class in the school despitethere was vacancy in the school in Pre-Primaryclass. The circularstates in clause (m) that after online system comes to end on March 31, 2016, the admissionprocessshall continueas per mannernotifiedin le notification dated January 7, 2011.

¶10It is the case of the petitionerthat his father came to know about EWS scheme and approachedthe respondentNo.l School for admissionagainst the vacant seat on August5, 2016. The respondentNo.l Schoolrefusedto entertainthe candidatureof the petitionerand informedthe father of the petitionerthat he did not applythroughonline system, so the petitioner cannot get the admission in the School. The father of the petitioner approachedthe concerned Deputy Director of Education and searched for istrict Admission Monitoring Committee and help desk but nothing was in existence and even officers there refused to accept the application of the petitioner who also intormed the father of the petitioner that he has missed an opportunity for admission of his ward. It is the case of the petitioner that on August 16, 2016 the father of the petitioner raised the grievance under PGMS to the Hon'ble the Chief Minister and the respondent Director of Education informed the petitioner that he has not applied for admission at the time prescribed for admission in the respondent No.l School and hence his claim for admission cannot be entertained. The petitioner's case is that the School Page 12 of36 or the Directorate never shown any vacancy in the respondent No.l School in online system so there is no question to apply against vacancy which never notified. Now the respondents refused admission to the petitioner in the School on the ground that he has not applied in the same through online system.

¶11The respondents 1 and 2 have filed their counter affidavit. It is the case of the dd respondents that they have not shown any reluctance to implement the provisions of+^e RTE Act, 2009 and land allotment condition or ever did any act which is contrary to the guidelines/instructions of respondent No.3. It is stated that the respondent No.l has only acted in accordance with the instructions issued by the respondent No.3 vide its letter dated November 18, 2015 and accordingly declared the vacancies in that particularmodule for the entry level class. They state that the respondentno.l School only declared the seats in class nursery in accordance with the circular dated November I, 2015, which clearly states that ''whenever any fresh admissions are made" and Schoolaccordinglynotifiedthe vacanciesin the Pre-School. However,School always declaredthe EWS vacanciesin all other classesalso as and when they occurredas per the guidelinesof respondentNo.3. It is also statedthat as the instantmatterpertainsto the admissionunder EWS categoryin Pre-Primaryfor which the respondentNo.3 has categoricallyinstructedrespondentNo.l Schoolvide its letterdated May 25, 2016 that the applicationfor admissionin entry level classesare to be submittedthroughonline only and the petitionerwas not a single applicantto apply againstthose vacanciesbut W.p.(C) 7945/2016 Page 13 of36 many other applicationswere also forwarded to the School by parents through drop box/post, which were declared by respondent School against cancellationof EWS admissions in the month of March/April,2016. It is also stated that even before receiving the applicationof the petitioner,the respondentNo.l School received 34 applicationsthroughdrop box/posttill May 31, 2016 in Pre-Primaryclassand for which e respondentNo.l School approachedthe respondentNo.3 to seek guidelinesbut no responsewas received. It is also statedthat respondentNo.3 vide its letterdated May 25, 2016 clearly stated that the applicationfor admissionin entry level classes are to be submittedthrough online only and since there were other applicationsreceivedthrough drop box/post against vacancies which were declared in the month of March/April, 2016 on cancellation of EWS admissions in Pre-Primary class till May 31, 2016.

¶12Respondent No.3 in its short affidavit has taken a similar stand, as has been taken ' them in W.P.(C) No. 7945/2016. An additional affidavit was also filed by the respondent No.3-wherein it is stated that in terms of Clause 10 of the Notification dated November 7, 2011, the respondent No.3 is empowered to issue instructions/guidelines/clarifications to Schools so as to ensure effective implementation of the provisions of the Notification. In order to implement the provisions of the Notification, the respondent No.3 issued a circular dated December 29, 2015 so as to ensure a fair, uniform and transparent admission procedure and to maximize the opportunity for securing admission under EWS/DG category. From the aforesaid , Page 14 of36 '>y circular,the respondentNo.3 has devisedacommononlineregistrationform, whichcan be accessedthroughthe websiteofthe respondentNo.3. All such candidateswho had appliedonlinefor EWS/DGcategoryas per the circularwere consideredfor admission throughcomputerizeddrawoflots. For centralizedonlineEWS/DGcategoryadmission process,the procedurefollowedis, all concernedSchoolswere directedto updatetheir acancy status of all entry level classes online on the respondentNo.3's website;the declaredvacancieswere made publicon the websiteand onlinemodulewas openedfor fillingup the applicationform w.e.fJanuary 1, 2016; the last date of fillingup the form was February09, 2016 afterextensionof date twice;thereafterfirst computerizeddraw of lots was conductedon February 15, 2016 and successftilcandidateswere informed throughSMS on their registeredmobilenumber;the list of successfulcandidateswere also displayed on the respondent No.3's website, thereafter second and third )mputerizeddraw of lots were conducted on May 24, 2016 and October 26, 2016 respectivelyagainst the remaining EWS/DG category vacancies after getting updates from the respectiveprivate unaidedrecognizedschools. It is the case of the respondent No.3 School that it would be erroneous to apprehend that admission process is closed by the 3V^ Marchof the relevant academicyear. The admissionprocessremainsopen only for those applicants who had applied online.

¶13On District Admission Monitoring Committee, it is the stand of the respondent No.3 that DAMC discharges its obligation as per the role defined in the Notification in Page 15 of36 respectofmanual admissionsto all classesin Schoolsrecognizedunderthe RTE Act. However,the respondentNo.3 in the interestof the school educationin Delhi and m orderto implementthe provisionsofthe Notification,issuedthe aforesaidcircularso as to ensure fair, uniform and transparentadmission procedure and to maximize the opportunityfor securing admissionunder EWS/DG category. It is the case of the ..jpondentNo.3 thatwithregardto admissionsunderthe EWS/DGcategoiy,the roleof DAMC comes into play after all online applicationshave been exhausted. It was submittedthatthe rightofadmissionwill firstgo to acandidatewho had appliedwithin the stipulatedtime periodafter having followedthe procedureprescribed. It is stated that still there are thousandsof such onlineapplicantswho have remainedunsuccessful even after the third round of computerizeddraw of lots. Hence, the presentpetitioner has no rightto be consideredby-passingthousandsofsuchunsuccessftjlapplicants. . It is the stand of the respondentNo.3 that if afterwards EWS/DG category vacanciesarise in a particularentry level class (not declaredat the beginningofonline process),not owingto fresh generalcategoryadmission,but due to any otherbonafide reasonsuch as attrition,cancellationof admissiondue to fake documentsetc, then such vacancies should be carried forward to the next entry level class during the online admission process of next academic session. Therefore, the EWS/DG category vacanciesofthis nature,if any in Pre-School/Nursery,Pre-Primary/KGor Class-Ishall be carriedforwardto Pre-Primary/KG,Class-I and Class-IIrespectively. Such carried Page 16 of36 nJ^ forward vacancies in Pre-Primary/KGand Class-I shall be filled through online admissionprocessfor the nextacademicsessionand carriedforwardvacanciesin Class-II shall be filledby the concernedschoolthemselvesthroughmanualadmissionprocess of next academicsession. This decisionhas been taken in order to ensurethat vacant seats are filled m a fair, uniform and transparent manner and to maximize the pportunityfor securingadmissionunderEWS/DGcategory. It is statedthat Clause 10 ofthe Notification,empowersthe respondentNo.3 to issue guidelines/instructionsfor admissionsunderEWS/DGcategoryin PrivateUnaidedRecognizedSchoolsofDelhi. On Public Grievance Monitoring System, it is stated that it ensures redressal of grievancesma fair and time bound manner. It has been evolved to ensure proper recording,trackingand monitoringofeachand everygrievanceuploadedon the portal. Writ Petition (Civin No. 9144/2nT6 . This petition is also filed by aminor throughhis mother seekingadmissionin Class KG under EWS Categoiy in the respondentNo.l. The facts of this case are identicalto the facts as noted in W.P.{C)No. 9069/2016exceptthat it is statedthaton September14,2016,the motherofthepetitionercameto knowaboutthe vacancyin the respondentNo.l School and approachedthe School for admissionagainstthe vacant seat. The respondentNo.l Schoolrefusedto entertainthe candidatureofthe petitioner and informedthe motherofthepetitionerthathe did notapplythroughonlinesystemso the petitionercannot get the admissionin the School. The mother of the petitioner Page 17 of36 approached the concerned DDE and searched for District Admission Monitoring Committeeand help deskbut nothingwas in existenceand evenofficersthererefusedto accept the applicationof the petitionerand she was informedby the officialsthat the petitionerhas missedan opportunityofgettingadmissionin the School. Itis the caseof the petitionerthat his mother has sent representationdated September29, 2016 to the ^ftpondentNo.l School and Directorateof Educationrequestingthem to admit the petitionerin the respondentNo.l School. The mother of the petitioneralso requested the Chairpersonof DAMC districtnorth west B FU Block, Pitampurato forward the name ofthepetitionerin the respondentSchoolbutno responsewas received.

¶16The counter-affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.l and 2 would reveal that the stand is the same as was taken in W.P.(C) No. 9069/2016.

¶17Insofar as the facts relatable to the petitioner are concerned, the petitioner has ^^l^ersubmittedany applicationwith the respondentNo.l Schoolat any pointoftime. It is deniedthat the petitioner is residing at a distanceof 500 meters from the respondent No.l School. According to the respondent No.l, the distance is of 4 kms. It is also stated that EWS vacancies in KG and Class I were declared subsequent to the cancellation of few EWS admissions in the month of March/April, 2016 whereas the DoE asked the School to declare the EWS vacancy for entry level class in November, 2015 for the academic session 2016-17. Hence, the respondent No.l School initially declared vacancies for closure in November, 2015 as fresh admissions were to be made M^.P.(C) 7945/2016 - '2& in Nursery only and subsequentlyin KG and Class I in following months in 2016. Subsequently,the vacant seats are under EWS categoryin KG and Class I were also displayedvide circulardated November 18, 2015. The respondentNo.l School has admittedthat it has receivedapplicationfrom the petitionerin the month of September 2016 and was subsequentlyadvisedas perthe instructionsofDoE, whichwere issuedto lool vide letter dated May 25, 2016. As a common stand taken by the respondent No.3 in its short counter-affidavitand additional affidavit,the same are not repeated for the sake of brevity. Writ Petition (CiviH No. 10361/2016

¶18The present petitionhas been filed by a parent of the child inter-aliaseeking admission for his ward for the academic session 2016-2017. The averments in the writ petition,beingidenticalto the one in W.P.(C)No. 7945/2016,the same are not repeated the sake of brevity.

¶19The respondentNo.l in its counter affidavithas stated, the petitionerhas not submittedany applicationwith the respondentNo.l withintheperiodof competencyof HQS for admission i.e August 31, 2016 but the applicationwas submitted after the expiryofperiodof competencyof HQS for admissioni.e on September22, 2016. It is also averredthat the petitioner is not entitledto admissionof his ward consideringthe fact that the distance of the house of the petitioner is more than 6 kms whereas, as per the guidelinesof the respondentNos.2 and 3 of neighbourhoodcriteria,the child/ward Page 19of36 • - residingwithinthe parameterof6kms are to be admittedfirst. Preferenceneed to be givento studentsbelongingto EWS/DGcategoryresidingwithin0-1 kms, secondlyto those residing 1-3 kms, thirdlyto those residing3-6 kms and lastly studentsresidmg beyond 6kms shall be admitted only in case vacancies remain unfilled even after consideringall studentswithinsix kms area. It is statedthat the petitioner'shouse is ...uatedaround 17 kms away from the School. Rest of the contentsbeing same, the same are not repeatedfor the sake ofbrevity. Sufficeto state,rejoinderhas been filed to the counter-affidavit. A statement was given by the learned counsel for the respondents2and 3on February28, 2016 that the counter-affidavitfiled in W.P(C) No.7945/2016is adoptedby the said respondentsin this writ petition. Sufficeto state, the stand of the respondents2and 3is the same as reflectedin short counter-affidavit filed in W.P(C)No.7945/2016. 'r\t Petition (Civin No. 10675/2016

¶20This petitionhas been filed by aparentof the minor child namelyHemangfor adinissionunderEWS/Freeshipcategory. It is averredin the writpetitionthat in April, 2016 the petitionervisitedthe officeofthe respondentNo.l and aftergoingthroughall the detailsofthe petitioner,the respondentNo.l gave some forms to the petitionerto be filledup. The petitionerfilledup the forms and alsopaidthe requisitefee butno receipt was given. That after some time, the respondentNo.l instructedthe petitionerto wait for afew days for verificationofdocuments. Afterwaitingfor few days, the petitioner was toldby the respondentNo.l thatfresh applicationalongwithpapersarebeingsent to relevantCommitteeof respondentNo.l for approval,which can take some more days. DespiteapproachingrespondentNo.2,no satisfactoryresponsewas given.

¶21Counter-affidavithas been filed by respondentNo.l. It is stated that the respondent No.l cannot directly take any application form from candidates for admissionunderEWS/DGcategory. Such applicationsare to be filled/submittedwith the respondentNo.3. The DAMC preparescluster/zonewise vacancy data for fresh seatsand otherwisenames ofthe childrento Schoolswherevacantseatsare available for admissionagainst seats following the principleof neighbourhoodSchool. The respondent No.l never received any application from respondent No.3/DAMC regardingthewardofthe petitionerfor admissionunderEWS/DGcategory. It is stated that the respondentNo.l received applicationof the ward of the petitioner from .jspondentNo.3 for admissionaftercompletionofnormaladmissionprocessunderthe EWS/DG category. It is also stated that instructionshave been received from the respondentNo.3 for takingadmissionin EWS/DGcategoryon November21. 2016 for admissionof Vedansh Kumar, S/o Pawan Kumar. The admissionis pendingdue to non-availabilityofcastecertificate.As andwhenMr. PawanKumararrangesfte same, the admission formalifies as prescribedin the guidelineswill be completed. The respondentNo.l statedthatthe petitionerhas neverapproachedthe said respondentfor admissionofhis wardunderany category. It is also statedthatthe name ofthe wardof Page 21 of36 W.P.(C) 7945/2016 " the petitionerdoesnot appearon the listsubmittedwithDAMC/respondentNo.3 as the applicationfor admissionunder EWS categorywas never received from respondent No.3 unlikeinthecase of othercandidates.

¶22No counter-affidavithas beenfiledby respondentNo.3. In any case,the counter-affidavit,as filed in otherwritpetitions,is consideredas the standofthe respondentsin [s petitionas well.

¶23Mr. N.K. Upadhyay,learnedcounselappearingfor the petitionersin writpetition (civil)no. 7945/2016,10675/2016and 10361/2016,apart from reiteratingthe facts of each ofthe writ petitionfiled by him, would submitthat in terms ofthe PublicNotice dated 16'^ April,2016 whereinin the lastParait is statedthat "theparentsmay submit their applicationsDIRECTLY to the school concernedafter verifying the vacancy positionfrom the School It may ALSO BE NOTED THAT NO ACTION WILL BE iKENON SUCHAPPLICATIONSin this Office"to contendthat the applicationsfor admissionwere entertainedby the Schools. That apart he would state that there is no transparencyin the admissionprocessagainstthe seatswhicharoseduringthe progress of the academicsessionbecause of attrition,cancellationof admissionon accountof submissionof fabricatedincomecertificateetc. He would rely upon the judgmentof thisCourtin the caseofJusticefor all v. Govt ofNCTofDelhi&Anr. in writpetition (civil)no.4607/2013decidedon 24"' November,2014 whereinit had directedthe Delhi Governmentto deviseamechanismto ensure25% reservationofpoorchildrenin play- ^ schools.

¶24Mr. KhageshJha. learnedcounselappearingfor the petitionersin writ petition (civil)no. 9144/2016and 9069/2016,apart from statingthe facts of the writ petition wouldsubmitthat underthe provisionsofSection12 (l)(c)ofthe Rightto Education Act, minor petitionersare entitledfor priorityadmissionunder the provisionsof the KfE Rules, 2011 read with DOE Notificationdatedt January,2011. He statesthat there is afailureon the part of the DirectorateofEducationto ensurecomplianceof provisionsof Section6, 8, 9and 12 (1) (0 of the said Act. Accordingto him. the Schoolssituatedon the DDA land, there is an obligationto admit 25% childrenfrom EWS category. He alsostatesthatin termsoftheNotificationdated7" January,2011, issue to implement section 12(l)(c)of Right to EducationAct, all the burden for admission has been shifted to the parents to approach the Schools with various "ocumentsand there is provisionofdraw oflot ifthe numberofapplicationsare more than availableseats in the Schools. The parentswho could not securethe admission have to approachthe DistrictAdmissionMonitoringCommitteefor admissionagainst free shipsseats'andthereisaprovisionto forwardthenameofthe deservingcandidates to the privateschoolshavingvacancies. Accordingto him as per the provisionsofthe DelhiSchoolAdmissionOrder,2011,the Schoolsshall completethe admissionprocess by theirown on 31»Marchand the vacancypositionshall be informedto the DAMC, whichwill forwardthe namesofthe candidatesto the Schoolsfor admission. He states Page 23 of36 that until the session of 2015-16, the respondent/ Directorateof Education was implementingthe provisionsofNotificationdated 7-^ January,2011,but in the current session,theDirectorateissuedguidelinesdated29'^December,2015 whichare contrary to the Rightto CompulsoryEducationAct,Notificationdated7'^ January,2011 and as suchvoid. Accordingto him,thecirculardated29"'December.2015 is applicableonly the first round of admissionwhich shall be closed on 31-March and after that Clause (m) of CircularAdmissionshall continueas per Clause7of the Notification dated 7'" January,2011. He would also rely on the judgmentofthis CourtmJustice for All (supra)to contendthatDivisionBenchofthisCourtmade strongobservations thatthe childrenbelongingto weakersectionshas everylittleaccessto justiceand they are not awarewiththe SchemeofEWS admission. He statesthatdespitebeingallotted land at concessionalrate, the failure on the part of the Directoratedevising any ..techanismfor ensuringthe complianceofthe conditionwouldamountto denialofthe rightto the weakersectionsofthe society.

¶25On the otherhand,learnedcounselappearingfor the Schoolswouldreiteratethe submissionsas made in theircounter-affidavit.In substanceit is theirsubmissionthat they are bound by the instructionsissued by the Directorateof Educationand have compliedwiththesaidprovisions.Mr. GautamNarayan,learnedcounselappearmgfor the Directorateof Educationand connectedrespondentsapart fl-om dealing with the facts ofeach case,wouldsubmitthat in termsofthe provisionsofSection12(l)(c)of Page 24 of36 ->7 the Rightto EducationAct, all privateunaidedSchoolsare boundto complywith such Notifications/ Circularsissued by the Directorof Educationregardingthe admission undereconomicallyweakersections/disadvantagedcategoriesat theirrespectiveentry levelclasses,Pre-school/Nursery,Pre-Primary/KGand the Class-I. In orderto ensure opportunityto the childrenfor gettingadmissionin EWS /DG categoryagainst25% its at the entrylevelclassesofthe privateunaidedschoolsrecognizedunderthe Delhi SchoolEducationAct / Rules devisedacommononlinemodulefor the session2016-2017 and accordinglyaCirculardated 29^^^ December,2015 was issued for admission underEWS /DG Categoryin all the said Schools. Throughthe Circularacentralized onlineregistrationform was devisedand all suchcandidateswho had appliedonhnefor EWS / DG category as per the Circulardated 29^^ December,2015 guidelineswere considered for admission through computerizeddraw of lot. He states that mthe ademicsession2016-2017,the lastdate for onlinesubmissionofapplicationsofsuch admissions was 22"^^ January, 2016, which was extended twice, firstly up to February,2016 and 9"" February,2016. At the initialstageofonlineadmissionprocess, all concerned Schools were directed to provide the respectivedetails online on the respondent/ department'swebsite regarding the respective entry-levelclasses and number of EWS / DG category vacanciesat the declared entry-levelclasses of the School. The Circularprovidesthat EWS / DG categoryadmissionin all three entry level classes in the privateunaided re-cognizedSchoolscan be done only by way of Page 25 of36 ^ School online admission module. He would also draw my attention to various provisionsofthe Act and the Rules and the Notificationdated 7'^ November,2011 to submit that in terms ofthe Notificationdated 7'"^ November,2011, the Directorateof Educationis empoweredto issue instructions/ guidelines/ clarificationsto Schoolsso as to ensure effective implementationof the Notification. It is in furtherance to ^plementthe provisionsof the Notification,the Circulardated 29 December,2015 was ensuredso as to have a fair / uniformand transparentadmissionprocedureand to maximize the opportunityof securing the admission in EWS / DG category. He conteststhe plea ofMr. Jha that the Circularis ultra-virusto the notificationand / or provisionofthe RTE Act. He also states that in the academicsession2016-2017,a computerizeddraw oflot was also held on 15"^ February,2016, 24"^ May, 2016 and 26 October,2016 respectively.He conteststhe standofMr. Jha thatthe admissionprocess . closedby 31'^Marchofthe relevantacademicyear. Howeverthe admissionremains open only for those applicantswho had appliedonline. He also refersto the Clause7 of the Notification dated January, 2011 which refers to District Admission MonitoringCommitteeand Clause2(l)(m) ofthe Circulardated 29"" December,2015. Accordingto him, the DAMC dischargesits obligationsas per the roles defined in the Notificationin respect of the manual admissionsto all classes in Schools recognized under the RTE Act. However, the answering respondent in the interest of School educationin Delhi and in orderto implementthe provisionsof the Notificationissued Page 26 of36 the aforesaid Circular so as to ensure a fair, uniform and transparentadmission procedureandto maximizetheopportunityfor securingadmissionundertheEWS/DG Categoryby way ofprovidingstamsofvacanciesat asinglepointthroughanswering respondentwebsite. This is in exercise of power conferred under Clause 10 of Notificationdated T'^January,2011. He states that the roles DAMC comes mto play er all onlineapplicationshavebeenexhausted. In otherwords,the rightto admission will first go to acandidatewho had applied within the stipulatedtime period after havingfollowedthe procedureprescribed.

¶26Havingheardthe learnedcounselfor the parties,the only issue whicharisesfor considerationis thatthe prayeras soughtfor by the petitionersin thispetitionis liableto be grantedwhenthe petitionershave not appliedthroughonlinefor admissionin terms of circularissuedby the Directorof Educationon 29'" December,2015. 1may only '' ite here, in none of the petitions,the petitionershave challengedthe Circulardated December, 2015.

¶27The stand is that the said circularshall hold good for those admissionsmade uptill March 31, 2016.and not againstthe vacancies,which may arise after that date becauseofattritions,cancellationofadmissionson accountofsubmissionoffabricated certificatesetc. In other words, the admissionagainstthose seats need to be made on the basis ofmanual applicationby the Schoolconcerned. Suchaplea is not appealing for the reason,the stand of the Directorateof Educationon the objectiveto introduce "^7 online systemto ensure afair, uniform, and transparentadmissionsunder EWS/DG category,can't be overlooked. As stated above, the petitionershave not submitted onlineapplications. In the absenceofapplicationsand alsoachallengeto the circular datedDecember29, 2015 it mustbe heldthattill suchtime,the onlineapplicationsare exhausted,the petitioners/wardsof the petitionershave no right to seek admissionon < 5Strengthofamanualapplication.

¶28Insofaras the plea ofMr. Upadhyayand Mr. Jha that admissionsmust continue throughoutthe academicyeartillMarch31,2017(inthiscase)by relyingon clause7(d) ofNotificationdatedJanuary7, 2011, Rule 13 ofDelhi RightofChildrento Free and CompulsoryEducationRules, 2011 and clause 2(m) of circulardated December29. 2015 is concerned,to answerthe issueand the pleaurged,it is necessaryto reproduce someofthe provisionsas referredto by thecounselfor the partiesduringarguments. "Section12. Frtentofsrhnnl'sresponsibilityfor free and compulsory education:(I) For thepurposesofthisAct. aschool,-

(a) specifiedin sub-clause(i) ofclause(n) ofsection2shallprovidefree andcompulsoryelementaryeducationto allchildrenadmittedtherein:

(b) specifiedin sub-clause(ii) ofclause (n) ofsection2shallprovide fi-ee and compulsory elementary education to such proportion of children admitted therein as its annual recurring aid or grants so receivedbearsto its annualrecurringexpenses,subjectto aminimumof twenty-fiveper cent; Page 28 of36 -4

(c) specifiedin sub-clauses(Hi) and (iv) ofclause(n) ofsection2shall admit in class I, to the extent ofat least twenty-fiveper cent, of the strength of that class, children belonging to weaker section and disadvantagedgroup in the neighbourhoodand provide free and compulsoryelementaryeducationtill its completion. Providedfurtherthatwhereaschoolspecifiedin clause(n) ofsection2 impartspreschooleducation,theprovisionsofclauses (a) to (c) shall applyfor admissionto suchpreschooleducation.

(2) The school specifiedin sub-clause(iv) ofclause (n) ofsection2 providingfree and compulsoryelementaryeducation as specifiedm clause(c) ofsubsection(1) shallbe reimbursedexpenditureso incurred by it to the extentofper-child-expenditureincurredby the State, or the actualamountchargedfrom the child whicheveris less, in suchmanner as may beprescribed: Provided that such reimbursement shall not exceed per-child-expenditureincurredbyaschoolspecifiedin sub-clause(i) ofclause(n) ofsection2: Providedfiirtherthatwhere such schoolis alreadyunderobligationto providefi-eeeducationtoaspecifiednumberofchildrenon accountofit havingreceivedany land, building,equipmentor otherfacilities,either free ofcost or at aconcessionalrate, such schoolshallnot be entitled for reimbursemento the extentofsuchobligation.

(3) Everyschoolshallprovidesuch informationas may be requiredby theappropriateGovernmentor the localauthority,as the casemay be. Page 29 of36 'h'i tSnfRTFtrt. 2009 No denialofadmissioni Achild shall be admitted in aschool at the commencementof the academicyear or .ithinsuch extendedperiodas may he prescribed: Providedthat no childshall be deniedadmissionifsuch admtsston,s soughtsubsequentto theextendedperiod: Providedfurtherthatany childadmittedafterthe extendedperiodshall complete his studies in such manner as may be prescribedby the appropriateGovernment. DelhiRightto Childrento FreeandCompulsoryEducationRules,2011 5SpecialTraining.-(1) TheSchoolManagementCommitteeofaschoolo^ned or managed by the Governmentor the local authorityshall identifychildren requiringspecialtrainingand organisesuch trainingin thefollowingmanner, namely:-

(a) the special trainingshall be based on speciallydesigned,age appropriate learningmaterial,approvedby the academicauthorityspecifiedin sub-sect,on

(1) ofsection29 oftheAct;

(b) the said trainingshall be providedin classes held in the premisesof the schoolor in classesorganisedin saferesidentialfacilities;

(c) the saidtrainingshall beprovidedby teachersworkingin the school,or by teachersspeciallyappointedfor thepurpose;

(d) the durationof the said trainingshall be for aminimumperiodof three months which may be extended, based on periodicalassessmentof learning prop-ess,foramaximumperiodnotexceedingtwoyears.

(2) The childshall, upon inductioninto the age appropriateclass afterspecial Page 30 of36 trainingcontinue,o receivespecialattentionby the teacherto enablehimMerto successfullyintegrate.iththe restoftheclass,academicallyandemottonally.

¶10Admission of children belonging to weaker section and disaU.antaged group.- (I) The school referredto in clauses (ni) and (iv) ofcause n section2shall ensure that childrenadmittedin accordance.ith clause (c) of sub-section(!) ofsection12 shallnot be segregatedfi-om otherchtldrentn classroomsnorshalltheirclassesbe heldatplacesandtimingsdifferentfrom classesheldfor the otherchildren.

(2) Theschoolreferredto in clauses(Hi) and (iv) ofclause(n) ofsection sha ensurethatchildrenadmittedin accordancewith clause (c) ofsubsection(I) of section12 shallnot be discriminatedfrom the restof,hechildrenin any manner pertainingto entitlementsandfdcUitiessuchas textbooks,uniforms,hbraryand informationand communicationtechnologyfacilities,extra-curncularactmttes and sports. , ^ i n

(3) The area or limitsofneighbourhoodspecifiedin sub-rule(1) ofrule shall apply to admissionsmade in accordancewith clause (c) ofsubsection(I) of section 12. Providedthat the Governmentmay. for the purposesoffillingup the requisite percentageofseatsfor childrenreferredto in clause (c) ofsub-section(I) of section12 extendtheselimitsofneighbourhoodfrom time to time.

(4) The Governmentmayprescribetheprocedureforadmissionofchildrenunder clause(c) ofsub-section(I) ofsection12 by officialnotificationissuedfrom time to time.

¶13Extendedperiodfor admission.- (!) Extendedperiodofadmissionshallbe Page31 of36 fl.en>onthsfromthedateofcommencenrentoftheacademicyearofaschool. L, ^ "" ' determinedby the headoftheschool ProvisionsofNotificationdatedJanuary07, 2011 , —./..p.—/. - :io/...—— applicatior,s and the .acant seats shall be renotifiedfor applicationsandalsobe notifiedto DAMC. 4(k) TheSchoolshallfurnishallsuchdetailsas mentionedinpare.(a). (cl (f), 1^, (h) and (i) resardin,free ship seats on its .ebsiteand also on offic^ websiteofDirectorateofEducationgivingalldetailsthroughthe mpro bythedepar,n,enton thesamedayorlatestbynextverydayofthesuckeven . 7(d) TheDAMCshallpreparecluster/zone-wisevacancydataforfree-seatsand shallforwardthe namesofchildrento schools.herevacantseatsareavaUa e for admission againstfree-seats,following the principle of neighbour school. CirculardatedDecember29, 2015 2(1) Aftercompletionofadmissionprocess,eachschool ^ /details regarding the number offilled and vacant seats under EWS Zgory at Ent^W«.... C— ./- MonitoringCommittee/DeputyDirectorofEducationofdistrictconcern^by mo hourson 07-04-2016. Simultaneously,thedetailsshallalso beprovided Page 32of36 ,He online module available AllDDE.ofthedistrieisshallcompiletkesaiddata(Numberoffilledandvacan seatsofEWS/DGCategory)zone-.iseandforwardthesameto Act-IBranchon

13.04.2016fortakingfurthernecessaryaction. 2(m) The admissionto such vacantseas ofEWSfDG Categoryis an ongoing process .hich may continue throughoutthe academicyear and the Dtstr.ct ' ' Admission Monitoring Committee has been empowered to get filled sue vacanciesandcan takestepsasper thedirectionscontained,n ^ ,UsDirectorate'snotificationNo.I5(l72)/DE/Act/20Wf69dated07/01/2011and Rule 13 ofDelhiRightto EducationRules, 2011.

¶29Section15 ofthe Rightto EducationActcontemplates,achildshallbe admitte inaSchoolat the commencementofthe academicyearor withinsuchextendedperiod as may be prescribed. Eventhou^,thispartofthe Sectioncontemplatesan extended periodto be prescribedbut firstprovisoto the Sectionstipulatesthatno childshallbe -deniedadmissionifsuch admissionis soughtsubsequentto the extendedperiod. The secondproviso also give an indicationwith regardto admissionduringthe extended periodby stipulatingthat the child shall completestudiesin such manneras may be prescribedby the AppropriateGovernment.

¶30The AppropriateGovernmenthas prescribedin terms of Rule 13 of the Delhi RightofChildrento Freeand CompulsoryEducationRules,2011,the extendedperiod to be five monthsfrom the dateofcommencementofthe academicyearofaSchooli.e Page33of36 31" Augustand it also contemplatesasituationthatifachildis admittedm after the extended period, he shall completethe studies with the help of aspecial trainingas determinedby the Headofthe School. At the same time, the very Rules doesvideRule 10(4)prescribethe procedurefor admissionofchildrenunderclause(c) ofsub-section1of Section12 by officialNotificationissuedfrom time to time. The fotificationdated January 7, 2011 issued under sub-section3of the Delhi School EducationAct. 1973.Rule 43 ofthe DelhiSchoolEducationRules, 1973 and Rightto EducationAct,2009 stipulatein casethe numberofapplicationsfor admissionagainst the freeseatsare belowthe numberofseatsavailable,admissionshallbe madefromthe available applicationsand the vacant seats shall be renotified for inviting forther applicationsand also be notifiedto DAMC. Suffice to state, this provisionof the Notificationdated January 7, 2011 does refer to District Admission Monitoring •ifcommittee and-therole ofDAMC is fillingup the free seats. It contemplates,if any free seatsshallremainunfilledandtheDAMCwhichis requiredto preparecluster/zone wise vacancydata for free seatsshall forwardthe namesofchildrento Schoolswhere vacantseatsare availablefor admissionagainstfree seats. Thisaspectis alsoclarified by clause2(1)ofcirculardatedDecember29,2015,whichreadsas under:- 1600hourson 07-04-2016. Simultaneously,the detailsshallalso p Page34of36 W.P.fC) 7945/2016 the online module availableor: ''^^^thrsaidlita^umblroffilledandvacant AllDDEsofthe districtsshallcompile seats ofEWS/DGCategory)zone-wiseandforwara

13.04.2016fortakingfurthernecessaryaction.

¶31The plea of Mr. Upadhyayand Mr. Jha if looked from the perspectiveof the aboveprovisionsis appealingandshallholdgood onlyifthe numberofapplicationsare jgsthanthe seatsavailable. In otherwords,afterall the applicantshavebeen given Emissionstillsomeseatshaveremainedunfilled. As notedabove,itisthestandofthe DirectorateofEducationthatthe drawoflotswereheldon February15,2016,May 24, 2016 and October 26, 2016 respectively and there are still thousands of onlme applicantswho have remainedunsuccessft.1evenafterthe thirdroundofcomputerized draw of lots. In view of such astand of the respondentNo.3 that the number of applicationsfar exceeds the seats available,surely the parents/applicantswho have submittedapplicationonlineand who have not got admissioncannotbe overlookedfor vacanciesarisenlaterduringthe academicsession.

¶37Furtherin termsof the Rules of 2011, the extendedperiodofadmissionis five months i.e 31''Augustofthat year. No doubt,the said periodis not afixed period, inasmuchas achildcan also be admittedthereafter,who shall be eligibleto complete the studieswith the help ofspecialtrainingas determinedby the Head ofthe School. Suchaperiodneedto beareasonableperiodand cannotbe stretchedtill 31«Marchi.e the lastdateofthe academicyearas an admissionmadeon the lastdateofthe academic Page 35 of36 year,presupposesthe childdid not havethe occasionofleaming/studies/trainingofthat particularclasstill that date. It is expectedthat childneed to achieveaparticularlevel of leaming/knowledge/trainingto progressto the next higherlevel/classso as to be at par withhis peers/studentsofhis age. The questionis whatshouldbe thatdate. Inote, Rule 5 of the Rules of 2011, which has been reproducedabove, does indicate the nimumperiodofat leastthreemonthsoftrainingbe givento achild. Ifthatbe so, an admissionmusttake placeon or before31''Decemberofthe academicyear,as from the date followingthat date i.e 1'^Januarytill 31'^Marchofthe academicyear,the periodis achieved. In the cases in hand, the saidperiodcannotbe achievedat this pointoftime. So the prayerofthe petitionersfor grantofadmissioncannotbe acceptedon thisground as well, apart from the ground that the petitioners/wardsof the petitionershave not submittedonlineapplication.The writpetitionsare dismissed. ; /[ Nos. 7936/2017(forstay)and32976/2016(forstay) in W.P.(Q 7945/2016 CM No. 36734/2016 (for direction) in W.PiQ 9069/2016 CM No. 36997/2016(for direction) in W.P.(C) 9144/2016 C^" Nos. 40720/2016(for stay) & 7956/2017(for stay) in W.P.(C) 10361/2016 CM Nos. 41829/2016(for direction) & 8667/2017(for stay) in W.P.(C)10675/2016 Dismissed as infructuous. ] V. KAMESWAR RAO, J MARCH 31, 2017/aA Page 36 of36

+ EN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: March 31. 2017 W.P.(C)9069/2016,CM No. 36734/2016 MASTERVANSHTHROUGH FATHERRAVINDERKUMAR Petitioner Tlirough: Mr.K.B.Jha,Adv. versus •w VENKATESHWARGLOBALSCHOOL& ORS Respondents - 1^. Through: Mr.O.S.Soran,Adv. for R-1-2 Mr.Gautam Narayan, ASC with I Mr.S.Baneiji,Adv. GNCTDalongwith / Mr.ShyamBehari,LA, Zone-13 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO