Leena Alok Dwivedi vs Union Of India on 23 February, 2021

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Leena Alok Dwivedi vs Union Of India on 23 February, 2021

Bench: Biren Vaishnav

              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 Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 01:55:43 IST 2022 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 1 KV No.3 AFS Vadodara W/L 104 Preference 2 KV No.2 EME Vadodara W/L 210

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.

Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 01:55:43 IST 2022 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 Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 01:55:43 IST 2022

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court