VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2015 › High Court of Delhi

Aakanksha v. University of Delhi and Anr

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
17 July 2015
Bench
Rajiv Sahai Endlawauthor
Case no.
W.P.(C) 6325/2015

Judgment

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. JULY 17, 2015 "gsr" / pp

Case details

Parties and counsel

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 17th July, 2015 + W.P.(C) No. 6282/2015 THUFAIL & ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Deepak Prakash, Ms. Shruti Srivastava & Mr. Venkat, Advs. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Jogy Scaria, Adv. for R-2. AND + W.P.(C) No. 6325/2015 AAKANKSHA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Bhushan Jain, Adv. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for University of Delhi. Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Adv. for R-2. AND + W.P.(C) No.6337/2015 AAKASH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Bharat Bhushan Jain, Adv. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for University of Delhi. Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Adv. for R-2. AND + W.P.(C) No.6362/2015 SAUMYA ARYA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Mr. Anunaya Mehta & Mr. Nikhil Palli, Advs. Mr. Deepak Prakash, Ms. Shruti Srivastava & Mr. Venkat, Advs. in CM No.11797/2015. versus MIRANDA HOUSE & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for University of Delhi. Mr. Dev. P. Bhardwaj, CGSC for UOI. AND + W.P.(C) No.6480/2015 AALOK KAMBOJ ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Shalini Kaul & Ms. Pushpinder Singh, Advs. Versus SHRI VENKATESWARA COLLEGE & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rajinder Dhawan & Mr. B.S. Rana, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for University of Delhi. Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, CGSC for UOI. AND + W.P.(C) No.6481/2015 ANKUR RAWAT & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Deepkaran Dalal, Adv. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for University of Delhi. Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for respondent no.2. AND + W.P.(C) No.6657/2015 & CM No.12141/2015 (for stay) RAVINDRA KUMAR & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Deepkaran Singh Dalal and Mr. Vivek Malik, Adv. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for R-1/DU. Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for respondent no.2. AND + W.P.(C) No.6658/2015 & CM No.12143/2015 (for stay) MEENAL AGRAWAL & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, Mr. Tungesh and Mr. Pravesh Sharma, Advs. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Adv. for R-1/DU. Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. for respondent no.2. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. All these petitions concern the following Clause in Annexure 1 to the Notification dated 20th May, 2015 of the respondent University of Delhi laying down the guidelines and schedule of admission to various undergraduate courses for the academic session 2015-16. "Admission to Science Courses The Basis of Selection for Mathematical Sciences / Science / Home Science courses remains unchanged. However the subjects to be included for Basis of Selection (PCM/PCB/PCMB) must have at least 70% component of theory exams (theory exam does not include internal assessment / continuous evaluation etc.) in the qualifying exam otherwise a disadvantage of 10% of the maximum marks may be levied on each such subject." 2. The petitioners in all the petitions are seeking admission to the respondent University / its affiliate colleges on the basis of having cleared qualifying examinations held by the Boards of Examination of different States having less than 70% component of theory examination but recognized by the respondent University as equivalent to the Senior Secondary School Certificate Examination (SSSCE) (Class XII) held by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). In accordance with the Clause aforesaid, the respondent University and its affiliate colleges have levied a disadvantage of 10% on the petitioners and aggrieved wherefrom these petitions have been filed. 3. Though the grounds on which the challenge is made may be different in different petitions but having heard the petitions together and being

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.