Archana Yadav and Others vs State of U.P. and Others

Shishir Kumar, J.—Heard learned Counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel.

By means of present writ petition, petitioners who claims to be student of Class XI want that mandamus be issued to respondents to accept registration form from petitioners and registered them as students of Class XI admitted in the year 2009-10 and further they may be permitted to appear in the Board''s Examination which will be commenced in the year 2011.

Petitioners submit that they are studying in Class XI in the institution but forms submitted by the institution has been refused by District Inspector of Schools which is apparent from the letter dated 28.7.2010 sent by the Principal of the Institution to the District Inspector of Schools. Petitioners have placed reliance upon a Judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 48932 of 2010 decided on 19.8.2010. Placing reliance upon aforesaid judgment, learned Counsel for petitioners submits that they are also entitled for the same relief.

On the other hand, Sri R.B. Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel submits that permission has rightly been refused in view of fact that recognition to petitioners'' institution has been granted on 21.1.2010, therefore, in view of Regulation of October, 2006 of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh, Chapter 7, Regulation 11 (Kha) clearly states that date of recognition will be treated to be effective from the date mentioned. It cannot be said to be retrospective. Admittedly, recognition to the institution has been granted on 21.1.2010, therefore, in anticipation no institution can admit students. As they have made an application for granting recognition, therefore, they are permitted to run the institution.

Learned Standing Counsel has also placed reliance upon a judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 56284 of 2010. This Court has taken a view that in absence of any such permission, there was no occasion for the institution to admit the students prior to the said date. Session of 2009-10 required registration of class XI by cut of date i.e. 30.11.2009. Therefore, their leaves no room for doubt that neither petitioners were granted permission to run classes nor peittioners have deposited the amount prior to the permission which has been granted.

Admittedly, recognition has been granted subsequently, therefore, if any admission is made by the institution and petitioners have deposited any fee that cannot be taken into consideration. Now permission has been granted, therefore, the institution of petitioners shall now in future is entitled to compete formalities in accordance with the rules but no relief can be granted to petitioners in this writ petition.

The writ petition is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed.

No order as to costs.