To, 11.09.2010
The Director of Education,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Old Secretariat Building,
Civil Lines, Delhi-110054,
Sub: Request to extend the benefit of Delhi High order dated 31.08.2010 in L.P.A. No. 635 of 2010 to all similarly situated students
Dear Sir,
Find enclosed hereto a copy of Order dated 31.08.2010 of a D.B. of Hon’ble Delhi High Court passed in LPA No. 635 of 2010 entitled Kumari Jyoti Gupta versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors, whereby the Hon’ble Judges were pleased to direct you to allocate the English subject to Kumari Jyoti Gupta in class XI subject to the condition that she will qualify subject of English pertaining to class X in the supplementary CBSE examination.
It is submitted that there are hundreds of similarly situated students of class XI studying different Govt. schools in Delhi who have been denied English subject & were forced to take Sanskrit subject despite their disliking for Sanskrit subject. In my opinion, the benefit of the aforementioned order should also be made available to all the similarly situated students at your end.
It is, therefore, requested that necessary action may kindly be taken immediately in this matter.
With regards,
Ashok Agarwal, Advocate
Advisor Social Jurist
M-09811101923
____________________________________________________________________
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
LPA 635/2010 and CM No. 15711/2010
KUMARI JYOTI GUPTA ....Appellant
Through: Mr. Ashok Agarwal and Ms. Kusum Sharma,
Advocates
versus
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS …Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Advocate for Respt No. 1 & 2
Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate for Respt No. 3
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
ORDER
31.08.2010
Calling in question the legal sustainability of the order dated 17th August, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.5393/2010, the appellant-petitioner has preferred this intra-court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
The appellant invoked the jurisdiction of this Court as she was not allocated the subject of English in Class XIth. The learned Single Judge denied the relief on the ground that she had not passed in English Subject in Class Xth but had passed in other five subjects which included Sanskrit.
Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that there is not prohibition for admitting a student in the stream of English if the circular dated 28th May, 2010 issued by the State Government is properly appreciated.
Per contra, Mr. Rajiv Nanda, learned counsel appearing for the State, submitted that the circular only enables a student to get admission to Class XIth but that does not really denude the power of the school to allocate the subject on a rational basis.
The learned counsel appearing for the State, submitted that taking admission is in one sphere and allocation of subject is in another realm.
In our considered opinion, the view expressed by the learned Single Judge is correct. Be it noted, a statement was made before the learned Single Judge by the Head Master of the school that if the appellant-petitioner would clear the supplementary examination in English, she will be allocated the same subject in Class XIIth.
The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that she may be allocated the subject in English, subject to the condition that she would qualify in the supplementary examination.
In view of the aforesaid limited prayer, we are inclined to direct that the appellant be allocated the English subject in Class XIth subject to the condition that she will qualify in the supplementary examination. On her failure, she would be brought to the original stream. It may be made clear that the aforesaid prayer is allowed at the risk of the appellant.
Mr. Atul Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the CBSE, has fairly stated that if the appellant submits an application for appearing in the supplementary examination in respect of the subject of English pertaining to class Xth examination within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the order passed today, the same shall be entertained and she will be permitted to undertake the supplementary examination.
With the aforesaid modification in the order of the learned Single Judge, the appeal stands disposed of without any order as to costs.
Dasti.
CHIEF JUSTICE
AUGUST 31, 2010 MANMOHAN, J
14 years old Class VI dropped-out-student Sonu is found working as sweeper today morning (11.09.2010) in the premises of the District Courts, Tis Hazari, Delhi-110054. The sanitation work in the premises is the responsibility of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. If anything wrong is happened to this child, who will be responsible?
