Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by charu on March 7, 2014 at 4:06pm

If the reason is justified, we must not shy away from fighting. guys this is pathetic to see all seats in 'elite' school being fulfilled by siblings and alumnis. we need to raise our voice. i think parents are assembling at DC, janakpuri. its a strong case, provided its presented right. im coming. my no. is 8130716633. 70 pointers have got a verry raw deal. u get pennies only if u accept them.

Permalink Reply by charu on March 7, 2014 at 4:08pm

i dont mind if the session is delayed a bit. but we need to raise our voice against this injustice to our children. 

Permalink Reply by Mitali Mehdiratta on March 7, 2014 at 4:09pm

Charu this is not the first time..and at least by removing transfer cases you are getting to face the draw of lot in some good schools

Permalink Reply by charu on March 7, 2014 at 4:17pm

why cant they just remove the fake transfer cases and do a draw promote the waiting list for those cases? why do they need to mess up all the lists???

Permalink Reply by Manoj on March 7, 2014 at 4:12pm

Dear Virender Kumar Anand

See this point , remove that point , remove all points then we will say this shall be first come first basis

I will be saying give weightage for first child, another will say to girl child and another will say add this quota or that.

See, we all shall give respect to the decision given by the court and shall happen this admission process otherwise things will never end.

Today you file PIL, tomorrow me and day after those who will not succeed in getting admission.

Try to understand seats are limited and we have to go by the rules.

If there are any point system created by LG that has some meaning as very well tried to explain by Tarun below.

So the best would be to prey for our kids admission in the school in which we want and stop fighting again and again

Permalink Reply by charu on March 7, 2014 at 4:19pm

@ manoj u want to pray that u get a seat for your child at the ratio of 1: 100 and let the alumni/sibling just walk over??? why cant we fight for sm just guidelines. why should we lump down this shit???/

Permalink Reply by Anuj on March 7, 2014 at 4:16pm

Guys, First you all were crying over Transfer Points, now you all are Crying over ALumni Points, you were crying for transfer as a transfer case can apply to many schools unlike Alumni who can apply to just 1 school. At that time all of you supported this Alumni case.

Now you all are behind alumni folks for your selfish reasons (SIC)

I was in a GENUINE TRANSFER CASE but not I am back to square one, I am not complaining and have accepted honble court verdict.

Please stop cribbing once and for all, sometimes luck plays a bigger role, there is no gurantee if Alumni are scrapped u can get in top notch schools as even list of parents seeking admission will increase.

Stop making a joke of urself

Permalink Reply by Manoj on March 7, 2014 at 4:21pm

Today we say Remove this point , remove that point , remove all points then we will say this shall be first come first basis

I will be saying give weightage for first child, another will say to girl child and another will say add this quota or that.

See, we all shall give respect to the decision given by the court and shall happen this admission process otherwise things will never end.

Today you file PIL, tomorrow me and day after those who will not succeed in getting admission.

Try to understand seats are limited and we have to go by the rules.

If there are any point system created by LG that has some meaning as very well tried to explain by Tarun below.

So the best would be to prey for our kids admission in the school in which we want and stop fighting again and again

Permalink Reply by Anuj on March 7, 2014 at 4:26pm

Agreed

Permalink Reply by Manoj on March 7, 2014 at 4:26pm

Dear Mitali

You are correct, we are just wasting our time nothing else. 

As there was several un genuine cases in Transfer cases and verifying the genuine and un-genuine was really not possible for anyone, so removal of tranfer cases was necessary

Now we shall not again and again raise 100000 of voices on different views and shall leave the rest on our babies luck

Permalink Reply by Amit Goyal on March 7, 2014 at 4:29pm

Let us fight against alumni and sibling points.....and make the process fair to all

Permalink Reply by SACHHIN SAPRA on March 7, 2014 at 4:37pm

YESTERDAY RE-DRAW COURT ORDER IN DETAIL 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 1497/2014 and CM APPL. 3124/2014 MAJOR SAURBH CHARAN and ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Bharat Singh, Mr. M.K. Ghosh and Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocates.

versus

LT. GOVERNOR DELHI and ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Raju Ramachandran, Senior Advocate with Mr. V.K. Tandon, and Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for respondents. Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Advocate for Intervener/ Social Jurist.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN O R D E R
06.03.2014 Present writ petition has been filed challenging the Order dated 27th February, 2014 issued by the Lieutenant Government, NCT of Delhi whereby 05 points for Inter State Transfer have been abolished. The said Order dated 27th February, 2014 further inter alia directs ?If the school has conducted draw of lots for those applicants securing 70 points, that draw shall remain valid for the selected/confirmed candidates only. Fresh draw of lots shall be held for remaining applicants having 70 points, including wait listed applicants and those applicants who were earlier securing 75 points because of ?Inter State Transfer Case? category.?
On the oral prayer of Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Advocate, Social Jurist, a Civil Rights Group, is impleaded as respondent No.4 in the present proceedings. The amended memo of parties be filed within one week. Let a complete set of paper book be supplied to Mr. Agarwal.
Issue notice.
Mr. V.K. Tandon, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Ashok Agarwal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.4. They pray for and are granted four weeks to file their counter affidavits. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.
Mr. Nidhesh Gupta, learned senior counsel for petitioners submits that no cogent or justified reason has been given in the impugned Order for deleting 05 points for Inter State Transfer. He further submits that the impugned Order is totally unjustified as the petitioners? children had already been successful in the draw of lots held by the concerned schools.
Mr. Gupta contends that as the petitioners? wards had been selected on the basis of the inter-state transfer points, they did not get an opportunity to participate in the main draw at a lower level with all the other candidates who had equal points. To illustrate his submission, Mr. Gupta, learned senior counsel for petitioners states that if there were 1000 applicants for 100 seats and 10 applicants were selected on the transfer points and the rest of the 90 seats were filled up with candidates having 70 points, then the wards of the petitioners did not get an opportunity to compete with all other 70 pointers for the 90 seats. Mr. Gupta states that while previously the wards of the petitioners had a success chance of 1:10 even without transfer points, today they have a success chance of 1:91.
On the other hand, Mr. Raju Ramachandran, learned senior counsel for respondents points out that as a large number of draws have already been held, legitimate expectation has arisen in favour of the parents of the successful candidates. He also states that any interim order at this stage would cause a lot of inconvenience to the successful candidates as they would have to go through the selection process once again. Mr. Ramachandran, learned senior counsel points out that after 27th February, 2014 a large number of schools have already conducted a second draw. Consequently, according to him, any change at this stage would result in a third draw.
Mr. Ramachandran, lastly submits that if a small price has to be paid by unsuccessful candidates, then also this Court in the larger public interest should not interfere.
Mr. Ashok Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for Social Jurist, supports the case of the petitioners.
This Court may mention that at this stage it is not inclined to stay the impugned Order in its entirety as this Court has been informed that upon a random survey of 58 leadings schools it was found that approximately 46.80% of open seats had been claimed under the Inter State Transfer Case and that 844 out of 1520 applications were not genuine.
Keeping in view such a large percentage of fictitious and fraudulent applications and the fact that it is difficult to check all the applications within the prescribed time frame, this Court is prima facie of the view that respondents authorities were within their jurisdiction to delete the 05 points on account of Inter State Transfer.
However, this Court is of the view that all equals have to be treated alike and all children who have secured equal points should participate in a single draw of lots. Article 14 of the Constitution reads as under:-
?14. Equality before law.?The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.?

This Court is of the opinion that if a draw of lots is not held amongst candidates who had secured equal marks, it would result in discrimination and a disadvantage to a few candidates. This Court is further of the view that inconvenience and delay cannot be grounds for denying equality before law.
This Court is in agreement with the illustration given by Mr. Gupta, learned senior counsel for petitioners that if a draw of lots is now held for remaining seats vacated by the transfer candidates amongst candidates who were initially unsuccessful in the draw of lots and candidates whose points have now been reduced, then the candidates who had initially secured 05 points on account of transfer would be in a disadvantageous position and their chance of admission would stand reduced. Consequently, only direction No. 3 of the impugned Order dated 27th February, 2014 is stayed and it is directed that all candidates having equal marks shall be considered equally by conducting a fresh draw of lots, wherever necessary. If required, the respondents are directed to issue a fresh schedule to give effect to this order. List the matter on 25th July, 2014. Order dasti under the signature of Court Master.
MANMOHAN, J MARCH 06, 2014

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page