C.W.P. No.2273 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 2273 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION : 28.3.2011 Ananya Chaudhary and another PETITIONERS VERSUS Union of India and others RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Shri S.K.Panwar, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Brijeshwar Singh, Advocate for respondent-1. Shri Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent-3. MAHESH GROVER, J. This writ petition is for seeking admission in the Nursery Class in the school run by respondent No.3. Ananya Chaudhary and Jagriti Rawal minor daughters of Shri Parveen Kumar and Shri Arvind Kumar respectively have not been evaluated correctly and the marks which were required to be given as per the criteria, have not been fairly awarded to the children and that is the reason they C.W.P. No.2273 of 2011 -2- have been denied admission. It is the specific case of the petitioners that the last admitted child was having 49 points, whereas the petitioners were having 48 points. The case which has been set up before this Court is that parents of the children were the alumni of the school and deserved 5 marks on this count. Likewise, no marks have been given under the head School Specific Parameters and if these marks were given to the petitiones, they would have been beyond the point obtained the last admitted child. The respondents have denied the claim of the petitioners and have stated that there was no material before them to show that the father of the children/petitioners were alumni of the school and under the head School Specific Parametres, the petitiones could not be awarded any mark, as the specifications as given out by the Ganguli Committee constituted under the judicial process in Delhi stipulated certain groups which broadly relate to the minority groups, religious minorities, linguistic minorities, socially disadvantaged sections and economically weaker sections and the remaining 15 points have already been given to the petitioners under the head Profession of Parents. It was next pleaded that no marks have been given under the head School Specific Parametres to any child and thus, the petitioners cannot have any grouse. On due consideration of the matter, I do not find any reason to interfere, as the respondents have followed a transparent policy of admission and have given out marks in points against specific heads in the criteria given out by the Ganguly Committee which criteria, the respondent/school in its wisdom thought it proper to adopt. The school being a minority institution, is very well within its rights to lay down specific criteria for the admission process and as per the judgment in T.M.A.Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka A.I.R. 1944 S.C.2372, they being fully authorized to do so, have adopted a procedure which as C.W.P. No.2273 of 2011 -3- observed earlier, is transparent and has been applied uniformly to all. No ground to interfere. Dismissed. (MAHESH GROVER) March 28, 2011 JUDGE GD WHETHER TO BE REFERRED TO REPORTER? YES/NO