Karnataka High Court
Krithi P Ajayan vs The Principal on 29 October, 2009
Author: B.S.Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
._ 1 ..
IN THE HIGH COURT 0}? KARNATAKA AT BANQ..A.§,oRE
DATED mxs THE 29'"! DAY OF {)C'I'C)B}§..'..i1?:.V:..
BEFORE .1 'A 'i
THE HUMBLE MR.JvU'ST-.'CAE
WRIT PE'___I'__moxc _ .
nwrwnm: 'A V' % %
Kxithi P.Ajaya.I1,
i3[o Ajaykumar, 5 years, _ _ V " .. .
R/a 42/ 1, Santhosh _ K }
Opposite to Attur Layout; _ '
Bangalore --- 56!') "
Minor by ._ _
Father and 1:32zit;11'a1--.
Sri _ V _ Pmrrrromn
(By K.1Nx,i3g:avsen Adv.)
Arm: '
17 ; Th:
V. ' 'Kfiradziya Vfiyakya.
CRPF, 'flfilahanka,
2.1133
Vigiyalaiya Management Committee,
Kcndriya Vidyaiaya,
CR? (Through Principal,
'' ' Kemixiya Viriyalaya $129123. RESPOIIDENTS
Sr}. Vishnu Bhat, Adv.)
.....2.....
This Writ Petition is filed under Articias 226 8:, 22'? of the
Coastinxfion of India praying to direct: the .--"1z:spo11dent
institution to five admission to the pcfiifioncr to
This Petitien coming on for
the Court macie the fol1owi3:1g:»~ " % = _ 1 V' ..
okn-ma, '
1. In this writ patiéon, pcfifiefisr 5
lat respondent -- w'{je}aha1ika,
Bangalore to give ad131issiQr:-----Vx{(}--_his_ d.2§ii'g*§2v1!3I. §KI'ii3l1i ff)!' 15' Standard. V R k V
2. It is th§: '<'.§_3se iéf he has sought for admissiexgf '31 the Kendriya Vidyéignya Bangalore, under the quota relating to singié"V:g§;1 year 2009-1{(} and submitted Qpgxlicatidn tinis regard on 22.02.2009 enclosing the 'I1§:;;¢cs$;fiA:y.Vj(iQ§:nments alcmg with an afiidavii. It is his further _u:é.'é_s€;3 t§j£1Piv.bV_h27§'vVdaughter is eligible to get {.116 admission in thf:
i3i'L¥titH,:fi(§fl:' the ground that she is the only giri child to him, in ..t:f:rmzs"<31}" the Gnidfiiines issued by the Kendxiya Vidyalaya which =. c:l*:£',z.r.«fly pnssczibed that the Gnly girl Chiki shall be admitted to the » ._ . institutiGn. Pefitienefs contention is that though there is vacancy in the instituticn, the authorities have deliberately f this admission to his daughter.
3. Learneci Ccunsel for the petitiomzr inviting t1;¢'éiit3nfion of the Court to the GUEDELINES FOR Anmisslcm--*ifQ:_'__}§'E;§'ssR1YA VEDYALAS (20€)9»-10) pI'0dU.C6d at A11I1exm'e--i?.'. as Guideline No.VHI Whexein pmvisiibn made, them is a requirements ti}-at Vadmifiititzzgitiie up to the full intake capacity tlie single fem.-aie children left afiisng 'V'1ii$:sE1iicc§:ssfiiIV'é1pj:iIicants, up to two single female c:11:21dIir:V11~'i;_1i--:'a:v each section of Ea:
Standard consisfiiig his further contention that thougjii so' far admitted out of the full is not given admission t}3,oug:hs."h:;e is ii h 4, ., ;cc:'111ns»31 iappfiaring for the respondcznts has filed " cgntendiiig inieraliz-1 that admissions have been given I 'was Guiéiefines. He: has invitfid the atientiejm of the court fAZO=.A'fl1fi statement of objections particularly at gage -~ 6, AA to sixes? how the actual admissions are gvcn. He has also a list containifig the names of the eight single girl U ___§<:hiidzt:n who have been acimitted for the 4 sections in the 15' standard pursuant to ths direction issued in this regard by this Court on the 1331: date of hearing.
J6"
...x3.,..
'ii
5. A perusal 0f the statement filed shows that as against the eight vacancies mservsd for single girl chiidzen €ig1a t "admission haw: b€e1:: made by the insiitutrion and thercfoJIi§:.':._tl:§.§;r~é" no jusfification for the petitioner to c0ntend""-,_f:h:a;ft'w. available in the quota reserved fi:'rM"Sii1g]¢'~Agir1'<§E§;iI:i;°{:ii# Tgzefigg the number of students a(1n1itterji1_'is:'*._1x67 éi;~;v ;ig3§n;S'$'."i=}fié*.§ota1A strength of 168, the i11stit11tic1:£'V"cann§.)t'«b€f0'V admit' the daughter of the ];)(';'.2i§"if)I1C{f="éiga'ii11Sf'--flhfi category as admission to generai 3v;1a$' an and and the excepfian is oniy for the special Categtyly'-i11c11v1§fi1i;gAL:fi}c' gir} children category. Hence, there is no Suiafistancé pctitim: and the same: is therefona disfzzissed?' * .
Sfi/' -
JUDGE rt;
5.1} ,