Manvendra Singh Suman Mahavidhyalay Village & ANR v. Union Of India & ORS

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MANVENDRA SINGH SUMAN MAHAVIDHYALAY VILLAGE & ANR ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Shashank Tripathi with Mr. Dipesh Dwivedi, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Vijay Joshi, Senior panel counsel for respondent no. 1/UOI.

Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, standing counsel with Ms. Niharika Rai, Advocates for respondent no. 2 & 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

O R D E R

% 22.01.2020 1.

The substantive prayer made in the writ petition is as follows:- "(a) Issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, Order or direction under Article 226 read with Section 151 CPC of the Constitution of India and direct to the respondents no.2 and 3 to accept the application form of the petitioner Institution for granting recognition of B.El.Ed. Course;"

2.

As is evident from the perusal of the prayer extracted hereinabove, the petitioner seeks issuance of a direction qua respondent no. 2 & 3 for acceptance of its application for granting recognition to B.El.Ed course.

3.

Though opportunity was given to the respondents to file a counter affidavit, no counter affidavit has been filed. 4.

The petitioner claims that the requisite fee has been deposited with the respondents within the deadline fixed for the said purpose. 4.1 In this behalf, my attention has been drawn to page 35 of the paper book.

5.

Ms. Dwivedi says that in view of the fact that fee has been paid and the petitioners claim that they could not upload the application because of a technical glitch, the application will be processed upon verification that the claimed fee has been paid. 6.

Thus, in case payment has been received as claimed by the petitioners, the respondents will process the application preferred by the petitioners. To facilitate the same, hard copies of the documents will be furnished by the petitioners to the respondents. 7.

Needless to add, respondent no. 2 & 3 will be at liberty to verify the contents of the application and the documents appended thereto.

8.

In the event of any deficiency being found, the same will be communicated to the petitioners who will remove the same within the timeframe defined by respondent no. 2 &3.

9.

The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J JANUARY 22, 2020 c