Master Garv Jarwal Thr Father Mukesh v. G D Goenka Public School Rohini Sec 22 & ANR

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4849/2016 & C.M.No.20240/2016 MASTER GARV JARWAL THR FATHER MUKESH ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Khagesh B.Jha, Advocate.

versus G D GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL ROHINI SEC 22 & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr.Asit Twwari, Advocate for R-1.

Ms.Renu Chauhan, Advocate for R2/GNCTD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 01.06.2016 Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondent-school not to cancel petitioner's admission in respondentschool and accept the fresh income certificate. It has been averred in the petition that petitioner has neither withdrawn his name from the school nor respondent-school has issued any cancellation letter, but he is unable to attend his classes as his name has been struck off from the school rolls on the basis of oral communication by the respondent-school.

Learned counsel for petitioner states that even fresh income certificate of the parents of the minor petitioner still disclose their actual income as less than Rs.1 lakh.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the orders dated 21st January, 2016 and 26th February, 2016 passed by this Court in

W.P.(C) 557/2016, wherein this Court directed the school authorities not to cancel the admissions of the minors on the ground of the misdeeds of their fathers.

Learned counsel for the respondent-School states that the seats in EWS category are still available with it and the minor petitioner can be accommodated in the school.

Learned counsel for GNCTD states that recently the GNCTD has simplified the procedure for issuance of an income certificate. She also confirms that the new income certificate is genuine. She has handed over a copy of verification report dated 31st May, 2016 issued by the Executive Magistrate, Rohini and the same is taken on record. As the issue involves the education of a minor and a genuine income certificate has subsequently been furnished and since no fault can be attributed to the minor, this Court takes a lenient view and directs that the admissions of the minor petitioner be restored and not cancelled subject to a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid to Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital, Delhi within a period of two weeks. This Court may mention that in the case of Master Jai Raikwar and Ors. Vs. The Heritage School and Ors., W.P.(C) No.2219/2016, it has allowed a similar writ petition.

Needless to say that the minor petitioner shall be entitled to all the benefits/entitlements under the said group. However, this Court clarifies that it has not expressed any opinion with regard to the criminal proceedings. Moreover, if the new income certificate furnished by the petitioner is found to be fictitious or not correct on any account, it shall be open to the respondents to cancel the admission of the petitioner in

accordance with law and no special equity shall be claimed by the petitioner by virtue of the present order.

With the aforesaid directions, present writ petition and the application stand disposed of.

Order dasti.

MANMOHAN, J JUNE 01, 2016 KA