De-recognition of School Cannot Be Used Against Students Who Have Already Been Granted Admission On The Basis Of Such School's Certificate: Allahabad HC
In a big relief to alumni of Jharkhand State Open School pursuing different courses at the APJ Abdul Kalam Technical University (AKTU), the Allahabad High Court on Friday held that the University could not delete their names from the college enrollment list merely because the school was found to be non-recognized, post admissions. Citing certain precedents, Justice Vivek...
In a big relief to alumni of Jharkhand State Open School pursuing different courses at the APJ Abdul Kalam Technical University (AKTU), the Allahabad High Court on Friday held that the University could not delete their names from the college enrollment list merely because the school was found to be non-recognized, post admissions.
Citing certain precedents, Justice Vivek Chaudhary said,
"Therefore, I do not find, either in law or in equity, that petitioners can be refused to complete their education now at this stage. Rather it would be very harsh upon the petitioners, who now are all aged around 19-23 years of age, to be declared as Xth passed and asking them to complete their XIIth again. They are all students of different technical courses and are successfully attending them. Even the University had recognized the certificates of Jharkhand State Open School when the petitioners took admissions."
In the present case the Petitioner students had completed their intermediate from the Jharkhand State Open School and had been admitted to AKTU in different courses, on the basis of Class-XII certificate of JSOS. Subsequently, on finding that JSOS is a fraudulent body and is not recognized, the University deleted their names.
Directing the University to permit the Petitioners to continue their studies as regular students, the court remarked,
"In the present case also, the students are not at fault. They were also deceived by the JSOS, as the AKTU was deceived. AKTU has also granted them admission and number of petitioners have already cleared their first year and are in their second year."
In Suresh Pal and Others v. State of Haryana and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 445, the qualification certificate of Physical Training Instructors were de-recognized by the Haryana State government. Ruling that such de-recognition could not be used to the deterrence of instructors, the Apex Court had said,
"it would be unjust to tell the petitioners now that though : at the time of their joining the course it was recognized, yet they cannot be given the benefit of such recognition and the certificates obtained by them would be futile, because during the pendency of the course it was derecognized by the State Govt."
Reference was also made to a similar ruling in Ashok Chand Singhvi v. University of Jodhpur & Ors., (1989) 1 SCC 399.
The Petitioners were represented by Advocates Anilesh Tewari and Desh Deepak Singh and the Respondent by Chief Standing Counsel Atul Kumar Dwivedi.
Read Order