Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 56297 of 2009 Petitioner :- Km. Madhulika Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Ravi Shanker Mishra Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Sanjay Misra,J.
Heard Sri Ravi Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the
parties and this writ petition is being decided finally at this stage
itself.
The petitioner claims to have submitted the form for admission to
BTC 2004 and to have received a letter from respondent no. 3,
Principal, D.I.E.T., Chitrakoot for submitting the original
certificates since the petitioner claims to have obtained necessary
quality point marks for being granted admission. According to the
petitioner earlier when her candidature was not considered, she
had filed a Writ Petition No. 32352 of 2009 (Km. Madhulika Vs.
State of U.P. & others) and this Court by the order dated 3.7.2009,
directed the Principal, D.I.E.T to examine the claim of the
petitioner and take a decision thereupon in accordance with law.
Learned counsel states that by virtue of the aforesaid direction the
impugned order dated 14.9.2009 has been passed by the Principal,
D.I.E.T. granting admission to the petitioner in BTC 2004 in the
Art category. The grievance raised in this writ petition is that the
petitioner ought to have been granted admission in the BTC, 2004
Science category.
The basis for challenge of the aforesaid decision is that the
petitioner has passed B.Sc. (ITA) with the subject of science
namely Physics and Mathematics as also Electricity & Magnetism
and therefore, she was a candidate for BTC Science and had also
passed High School and Intermediate with science subjects.
Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has referred to
paragraph 2 (C) of the counter affidavit and submits that a
clarification was sought by the Principal from the Director
S.C.E.R.T., Lucknow and in reply he was informed by the letter
dated 24.6.2009 that if a candidate has passed B.Sc. (ITA) with the
subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Biology, he
would be considered as a candidate for admission to BTC Science.
Learned Standing Counsel has also referred to the aforesaid letter
dated 24.6.2009 filed as Annexure-3 to the counter affidavit. He
states that when the petitioner was not having the subjects of
Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Biology in B.Sc. (ITA)
course, she could not be considered as a candidate for admission in
BTC Science and hence the learned Standing Counsel has justified
the impugned order dated 14.9.2009.
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and perused the record, it appears that the petitioner had
passed High School and Intermediate examination with science
subjects namely Mathematics, Science-2, Physics and Chemistry.
In the Course of B.Sc. (ITA), the petitioner has passed foundation
course on Physics and foundation course on Mathematics
alongwith Electricity & Magnetism as subject and therefore, her
claim is for admission to BTC Science.
From the record, the requirement of having Physics, Chemistry,
Mathematics and Biology does not appear to be satisfied in case all
the four science subjects are required to be in the course of B.Sc
(ITA) inasmuch as the petitioner admittedly did not have
Chemistry and Biology as subject in B.Sc. (ITA). However, the
grievance raised by the petitioner requires consideration inasmuch
as the instruction dated 24.6.2009 does not clarify as to whether a
candidate must have all the four science subjects in B.Sc. (ITA)
course or having two science subject in the B.Sc. would suffice for
admission in BTC science. Such decision can be taken by the
authority which has issued the instruction on 24.6.2009 by giving
clarification on that account. This Court would therefore, not
interpret the instruction dated 24.6.2009 and it is appropriate to
leave it to be decided by the competent authority.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the
Director, S.C.E.R.T., Lucknow as respondent no.5 for whom
learned Standing Counsel has appeared.
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it would be appropriate
that the petitioner should file a certified copy of this order before
the respondent no.5 within a period of two weeks from today and
upon the said being filed, the respondent no. 5 is required to take a
decision as referred to above on the instruction issued by him on
24.6.2009 by clarifying whether admission to BTC science would
require a candidate to pass all the four science subjects or pass
only two science subject in B.Sc. (ITA) which would suffice for
admission in BTC science.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed its opinion on the
interpretation of instruction dated 24.6.2009 and that has to be
done by the respondent no.5.
Incase the respondent no.5 finds that the petitioner is qualified for
admission to BTC Science, suitable action be taken by him
forthwith within two weeks thereafter.
The petitioner will file a self addressed, registered post duly
stamped envelop before the respondent no.5 alongwith a certified
copy of this order for communication of his decision to the
petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of finally.
No order is passed as to costs.
Order Date :- 5.7.2010
Lbm/-