Dismissed

Chahat Peshin v. Panjab University & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Aug 2018CWP/16849/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition where the petitioner sought admission under the Kashmiri Migrant Quota at Panjab University. The court upheld the University's refusal, holding that the certificate issued by the Deputy Commissioner, UT Chandigarh did not satisfy the prospectus requirement for a certificate from the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district.

What did the court decide?

The petition challenging the admission decision is dismissed.

Chahat Peshin Vs Panjab University & Ors. — Education and Admissions | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CWP-16849-2018

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP-16849-2018 Date of decision: 01.08.2018

Chahat Peshin

.... Petitioner

versus

Panjab University & ors.

¶9

.... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU

¶11

Present: Mr. Gursimranjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Arun K.Bakshi, Advocate for the respondents.

¶13

¶14

Mahesh Grover, J.(Oral)

¶15

The petitioner made a claim to the seat in Kashmiri Migrant Quota. The requirement as set out in the prospectus is extracted herebelow:

¶16

Seat for Kashmiri Migrants

¶17

One seat is available for Kashmiri Migrants vide notification No.16/2/94-IH(3)-2007/11638 dated 12.06.2007 of the Chandigarh Administration. This seat does not belong to any specific quota (Chandigarh/All India) and shall be filled in by the eligible candidate on the basis of the eligibility criteria and combined merit list drawn by CBSE on the basis of Joint Entrance Examination JEE (Main) – 2018 paper – II (B.Architecture/ B.Planning).

¶18

A candidate seeking admission against Kashmiri Migrant reserved seat is required to produce a certificate, from the Deputy Commissioner/Relief Commissioner of the concerned District to the effect that he/she belongs to a migrant family from Jammu and Kashmir. The admission of a candidate against this category will be provisional, subject to the verification of his/her above mentioned certificate by the

¶19

Sonia Bura 2018.08.16 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

CWP-16849-2018

-2-

issuing authority.

7.2.8 Kashmiri Migrants/Displaced Persons

¶24

a) The candidates applying for admission under this Category must produce Kashmiri Migrants/Displaced certificate issued by Relief Commissioner/Deputy Commission of the concerned district/area.

¶25

b) they should also carry a valid domicile (of J&K) of either of their parents.

¶26

The University considered the claim of the petitioner but declined it as the petitioner had not submitted the requisite document i.e.

¶27

i) Deputy Commissioner Certificate

¶28

ii)Domicile of father/mother

¶29

The petitioner then contends that the documents were not deficient as she has produced the Domicile Certificate of her mother and Migrant Certificate as well.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed to the Migrant Certificate(Annexure P-4) on record and we find that the said Certificate has been issued by the Deputy Commissioner, U.T., Chandigarh.

¶31

Learned counsel for the respondent-University contends that it has been clearly mentioned in the conditions set out in the prospectus that the Migrant/ Displaced Certificate has to be issued by Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district/area and thus, the Migrant Certificate submitted by the petitioner cannot be treated as valid certificate even if the Domicile Certificate is accepted as correct.

¶32

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that we cannot find fault with the stand of the respondentUniversity that Kashmiri Migrant Certificate has to be issued by the Deputy Sonia Bura Commissioner of the concerned district/area. The Certificate issued by the 2018.08.16 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

¶33

CWP-16849-2018

¶34

-3-

¶35

Deputy Commissioner, UT, Chandigarh obviously does not fit in the requirement set out in the prospectus.

¶36

Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

¶37

(MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE

¶38

01.08.2018 (MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) sonia JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No

¶39

Sonia Bura 2018.08.16 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Chahat Peshin v. Panjab University & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chahat Peshin v. Panjab University & Ors.

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

Dr Sagar Khera Vs Director General Pgimer

Rajesh Kapoor Vs the Director Pgimer

Gauri Bajaj Vs Kurukshetra University, and Others

Krishan and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Ritu and Anr. Vs Kurukshetra University, Kurushetra and Others

Baldev Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others