Disposed

The Principal Madho Singh Girls Inter College and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2018WRIC/1514/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition regarding the non-appointment of the petitioner's institution as an examination centre. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Board for a nearer centre if available, leaving the issue for further representation.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to represent the Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P., for allotment of a closer examination centre to the students enrolled in the petitioner's

The Principal Madho Singh Girls Inter College and… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1514 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- The Principal, Madho Singh Girls Inter College And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 5.

¶6

The grievance of the petitioners is two-fold. The first is that there was no good reason not to appoint petitioner's institution as an examination centre. The second is that even if the petitioner's institution was not considered eligible as examination centre, the students of the petitioner's institution, being girls, ought to have been provided examination centre much closer to the petitioner's institution than what has been provided.

¶7

This Court by its order dated 11th January, 2018 had required the learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions to disclose reason for removing petitioner's institution from the list of examination centres.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel though could not obtain instruction as directed by this Court but learned counsel for the petitioners has been fair enough to inform the Court that the petitioner's institution was not shortlisted because it did not have facility of CCTV cameras, which was one of the requirements for an examination centre.

¶9

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press prayer to appoint petitioners' institution as an examination centre. The second prayer of the petitioners is to allot any other examination centre close to the petitioner's institution to the students of petitioners' institution. The second prayer has been pressed.

¶10

It has been submitted that there are several institutions within three to four km radius from the institution of the petitioners and many of them have been appointed examination centres therefore the students enrolled in the petitioner's institution can be adjusted there.

¶11

Be that as it may, without expressing any opinion on the merits of claim of the petitioners, this Court considers it appropriate to dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioners to represent to the second respondent (Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P., Allahabad) in respect of allotment of any other examination centre to the students enrolled in the petitioner's institution provided there exists an examination

¶12

centre nearer to the one already provided. If any such representation is filed by the petitioner's institution within three days from today, appropriate decision shall be taken by the second respondent, after calling for necessary reports, preferably within a period of one week from the date of filing such representation.

¶13

With the aforesaid liberty, the petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 18.1.2018. Rks.

The Principal Madho Singh Girls Inter College and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Principal Madho Singh Girls Inter College and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Kumar Mittal Vs Vice Chancellor Chaudhary Charan Singh University MEERUTandANR

The Anjuman-E-Rahmania and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandrajeet Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Syed Saif Ali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

C/M Bal Niketan Junior High School and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

C/M Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Intermediate College and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others