IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16188 of 2010 1. AFJAL IMAM MINOR S/O SHRI ABDUL HAKIM REPRESENTED THROUGH THE FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SHRI ABDUL HAKIM, R/O VILL.- SAINWARA, P.O.- MADHURAPUR, P.S.- BAJPATTI, DISTT.- SITAMARHI 2. ABHIJEET KUMAR MINOR S/O SHRI VIRENDRA KUMAR REPRESENTED THROUGH THE FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SHRI VIRENDRA KUMAR, R/O VILL.- VANGAON BAZAR, P.O.- BAJPATTI, P.S.- BAJPATTI, DISTT.- SITAMARHI 3. ANISH BHARTI MINOR S/O SHRI NAND KISHORE GUPTA REPRESENTED THROUGH THE FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SHRI NAND KISHORE GUPTA R/O VILL. + P.O.- RAMPUR BAKHRI, P.S.- DUMRA, DISTT.- SITAMARHI Versus 1. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ALL INDIA ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURE ENTRANCE EXAMINATION UNIT, P.S.- 1-2, I.P. EXTENSION INSTITUTIONAL AREA (NEAR GAJIPUR VILLAGE, BUS STAND), PATPARGANJ, DELHI - 110092, REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, ALL INDIA ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURE ENTRANCE EXAMINATION UNIT, P.S.- 1-2, I.P. EXTENSION INSTITUTIONAL AREA (NEAR GAJIPUR VILLAGE, BUS STAND), PATPARGANJ, DELHI-110092 2. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ALL INDIA ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURE ENTRANCE EXAMINATION UNIT, P.S.- 1-2, I.P. EXTENSION INSTITUTIONAL AREA (NEAR GAJIPUR VILLAGE, BUS STAND), PATPARGANJ, DELHI - 110092 3. THE EXAMINATION CONTROLLER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ALL INDIA ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURE ENTRANCE EXAMINATION UNIT, P.S.- 1-2, I.P. EXTENSION INSTITUTIONAL AREA (NEAR GAJIPUR VILLAGE, BUS STAND), PATPARGANJ, DELHI - 110092 4. THE JOINT SECRETARY, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ALL INDIA ENGINEERING/ARCHITECTURE ENTRANCE EXAMINATION UNIT, P.S.- 1-2, I.P. EXTENSION INSTITUTIONAL AREA (NEAR GAJIPUR VILLAGE, BUS STAND), PATPARGANJ, DELHI - 110092 5. PRINCIPAL, NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA, KHAIRBI, SITAMARHI ----------- 6/ 20/06/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Central Board for Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as the C.B.S.E.)as also the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Sitamarhi. The criteria fixed for admission to Class-VI stipulated 75% vacancies to be filled by candidates from rural area and the remaining from urban area. The controversy relates to admissions granted in the rural area. 2 To ensure equitable distribution of seats, the rural vacancies were apportioned Blockwise under guidelines/rules issued by the C.B.S.E. The petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that any person securing marks lesser then them from their block have been given appointment in the rural category. The fact that a candidate with lesser marks from another block may have been appointed in the rural category is of no relevance. To accept the contention of an inter block competitiveness with regard to the marks obtained for admission shall be defeating the very purpose of the guidelines/rules for preparation of a Blockwise seniority list based on marks obtained for admission to ensure proportionate representation. The submission on behalf of the petitioner that the prospectus did not disclose that the rural vacancies shall be distributed proportionately Blockwise and neither were the guidelines/rules in question being relied upon by the C.B.S.E. made known to the applicants and therefore shall not be applicable to them, merits no consideration and has to be stated to be rejected. There is no merit in this application. It is accordingly dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)