CWP 14435/2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH SB Civil Writ Petition No.14435/2009 Miss. Nida Qazi Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors. DATE OF ORDER : 31/03/2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mrs. Naina Saraf for petitioners. Mr. Sunil Kr. Jain, for respondent No.2 Mr. HV Nandwana, for respondent No.4 Petitioner in the instant petition, after having participated in PTET-2009,, as per order of her merit and preference, was allotted Ramakrishna Malila TT College, Ganesh Road, Kesapura, Ajmer Road, Bhankrota, Sanganer, Jaipour for joining the B.Ed. Course. In terms of the communication made to the petitioner, she was to report in the institution in between 01/11/2009 to 05/11/2009. Counsel for petitioner submits that when the petitioner tried to find out the institution at the address, aforesaid, it was revealed to her that the institution has changed its establishment to Village- Retaliya, Phagi Road, Sanganer, Jaipur and since it was not convenient to her, she made a representation to the authorities and finally approached this Court by filing the instant CWP 14435/2009 [2] petition for seeking transfer to some other institution where seats are presently available. The ultimate fact remains that the petitioner has neither submitted documents nor deposited fees with the institution allotted to her in between 01/11/2009 to 05/11/2009 and for all practical purposes, has not joined the institution. The respondent No. 4 has filed reply and submit that letter was sent to the Coordinator, PTET-2009 for making proper correction in the address of the establishment of the institution way back on 21/06/2009 but it appears that the Coordinator failed to make proper correction in the address of the institution on the website of the PTET-2009 and in such circumstances at least the institution cannot be said to be at fault. It has also been informed to this Court that the present institution has intake capacity of 100 students and 95 students have already joined the B.Ed. Course despite change in the place of establishment. The grievance raised by the petitioner cannot be said to be justified for the reason that as per petitioner's option institution was allotted to her and despite there being a change in its establishment which might not CWP 14435/2009 [3] have been taken note of by the respondent Coordinator, PTET-2009 and despite created some inconvenience as alleged to the petitioner but when 95 students out of 100 have joined the institution, there appears to be no justification for the petitioner not to report and deposit the fees with the institution which was allotted to her. So far as the submission made by counsel for petitioner that she may now be considered for transfer, suffice it to say that once the institution was allotted to the petitioner which she failed to join only for the reason that it was inconvenient, will not give any right to seek transfer to another institution unless permissible under law. No such guidelines laid down by the Coordinator, PTET- 2009 to the contrary has been brought to the notice of the Court in this regard. Consequently, this Court does not find any substance in the writ petition and the same stands dismissed. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. Raghu/p.3/14435-CW-2009-final.doc