Naseem Vs. State of Haryana & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Special Leave Petition (C) No. 4113 of 2002
(From the Judgment and Order dated 10.1.2002 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 14124 of 2001)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 10.1.2002 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 14124 of 2001)
Petitioner: Naseem
Respondent: State of Haryana & Ors.
Apeal: Special Leave Petition (C) No. 4113 of 2002
(From the Judgment and Order dated 10.1.2002 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 14124 of 2001)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 10.1.2002 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 14124 of 2001)
Judges: R.C. LAHOTI & Dr. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 26, 2003
Appearances:
Dr. Sushil Balwada, Mr. Anil Hooda and Mr. S.K. Sabbarwal, Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr. Neeraj K. Jain, Mr. A.K. Choudhary, Mr. Bharat Singh, Mr. Sanjay Singh, Mr. J.B. Mudgil, Mr. Ugra Shankar Prasad and Mr. L.K. Pandey, Advocates for the Respondents.
Head Note:
EDUCATION
Admission to educational institutions – Scope of judicial review. Held court cannot compel an autonomous institution to grant admission to a candidate not holding the requisite eligibility qualification from an institution recognized by it.
Admission to educational institutions – Scope of judicial review. Held court cannot compel an autonomous institution to grant admission to a candidate not holding the requisite eligibility qualification from an institution recognized by it.
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. The petitioner has been denied admission on the ground that she had passed the qualifying examination from an institution not recognised by the respondent no. 2. We cannot compel an autonomous educational institution to grant admission to a candidate not holding the requisite eligibility qualification from an institution recognised by it. Since the admission has been denied at the very threshold, the applicability of the rule of promissory estoppel is also not attracted. No fault can be found with the view taken by the High Court. The special leave petition is dismissed.
******
1. The petitioner has been denied admission on the ground that she had passed the qualifying examination from an institution not recognised by the respondent no. 2. We cannot compel an autonomous educational institution to grant admission to a candidate not holding the requisite eligibility qualification from an institution recognised by it. Since the admission has been denied at the very threshold, the applicability of the rule of promissory estoppel is also not attracted. No fault can be found with the view taken by the High Court. The special leave petition is dismissed.
******
