Yuvraj Singh Sandhu v. University Of Delhi And ANR.
$~33.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.10652/2018 & CM No.41538/2018 (for stay). YUVRAJ SINGH SANDHU ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr. Rajeev Saxena and Mr. Manish Khurana, Advs.
versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ANR.
..... Respondents Through:
Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Mr. Prang Newmai and Ms. Slomita Rai, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
O R D E R
% 15.10.2018 CM No.41539/2018 (for exemption).
1.
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2.
The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.10652/2018 & CM No.41538/2018 (for stay). 3.
This petition, though not on the Roster of this Bench, has been received at about 1245 hours in terms of General Direction dated 15th October, 2018 of Hon'ble the Chief Justice owing to the Roster Bench Judge being on leave.
4.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks mandamus directing the respondent no.1 University of Delhi and respondent no.2 Shri Guru Nanak Dev Khalsa College to grant admission to the petitioner to three years BA (Hons.) Political Science decree course for the Academic Session 2018 to 2021.
5.
The counsel for the petitioner has argued (i) that the name of the petitioner was contained in the seventh admission list; (ii) that the petitioner W.P.(C) No.10652/2018
submitted his documents for verification on 8th August, 2018; and, (iii) that the documents were found in order and the petitioner was allowed to submit the fee but the portal of the respondent University shut down on that date and thereafter for reason of family circumstances the petitioner could not deposit the fee.
6.
The last date of admission, prescribed was 31st August, 2018. This petition itself is dated 1st October, 2018, was filed on 4th October, 2018 and came up before this Court first on 5th October, 2018 when on request of the counsel for the petitioner, it was adjourned to today. 7.
The last date having gone by and the petitioner having not acted urgently even after 31st August, 2018 and having filed the present petition after more than one month, no case for interfering with the rules of admission laid down by the respondent University arises. 8.
The counsel for the respondent University also states that the session began in July, 2018 and the first semester examination will be held in November, 2018 and the petitioner cannot be admitted now. 9.
Per contra, the counsel for the petitioner has contended that there is still a seat.
10.
Merely for the sake of filling up of the seats, rules of educational institutions, meant to subserve the purpose of academic excellence, cannot be interfered with.
Dismissed.
Dasti under signature of Court Master.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J OCTOBER 15, 2018/'pp'..
W.P.(C) No.10652/2018