Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4.mca.35.2022 judge.odt in support of her claim had relied upon the letter dated 15.01.2021 received from the School under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Wherein, it was mentioned that the documents namely the application and the copy of the affidavit submitted for correction of the caste as per Rule 26.4 Appendix VI of the Secondary School Code were not available and therefore, the certified copy of the application and certified copy of the affidavit could not be issued. Since, the reference to Rule 26.4 Appendix VI of the Secondary School Code was made in this application the relevant observations came to be made in the judgment. However, the claim of the petitioner has not been rejected solely on the basis of the non- compliance of the requirement of Clauses 26.4 and 26.3 of the Secondary School Code. It is to be noted that on the analysis of the documentary evidence a finding has been recorded that the same were not sufficient to accept the claim of the applicant. One of the grounds for rejecting the claim was non compliance of the provisions of Secondary School Code. Even if it is accepted that Secondary School Code is not applicable in the case of the applicant it would not make any difference in as much as that the finding of