MASTER SATYAM GANDHI versus UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH AND ORS.

Citation: [2015] 10 S.C.R. 569 · Decided: 16-09-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 10 S.C.R. 569 
MASTER SATYAM GANDHI 
v. 
UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 7136 of 2015) 
SEPTEMBER 16, 2015. 
[M. Y. EQBAL AND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.] 
Education/Educational Institutions: School admission 
A 
B 
- Admission to XI class - Respondent-school declined 
the medical stream to the appellant-writ petitioner on the C 
ground that he is ineligible for the said stream on the basis 
of his pre-board result - Respondent-school stated that 
the appellant was offered the commerce stream but he 
categorically refused to take admission into the commerce 
stream - Held: Appellant was found ineligible and denied o 
admission in the medical stream because of his marks in 
the pre-board result and aptitude conducted by the school 
- He was given option to take admission in the commerce 
stream which he did not opt at the first instance and as a 
result admission in the commerce stream was over- High E 
Court rightly held that the relief sought for by the appellant 
cannot be granted by issuing appropriate writ directing the 
· school to admit the appellant even in the commerce 
stream - This court further stated that the students who 
study up to Class X In any school whether aided or non-
F 
aided, such students are entitled to get admission in Class 
XI in the same school unless he or she declines before 
the admission is closed - However, in which stream they 
are to be admitted, it depends upon their merits and 
performance that shall be decided by the school authority. 
G 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 
7136 of 2015 
From the Judgment and Order dated 03.08.2015 in H 
569 
570 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 10 S.C.R. 
A High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP 
No. 8009 of 2015. 
Malini Poduval for the Appellant. 
B 
P.H. Parekh (for Parekh & Co.,) for the Respondents. 
The Order of the Court was delivered by 
M. Y. EQBAL, J.: 1. The petitioner has preferred this 
special leave petition against the impugned order dated 
C 03.08.2015 passed by the High Court of Punjab and 
Haryana in CWP No.8009 of 2015. 
2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass . 
0 
3. The petitioner was a student of the respondent-school 
viz., St. Jones School, Chandigarh. The school is affiliated 
with the CBSE. The petitioner passed his Class X and was 
interviewed on 24.03.2015 for the purpose of admission in 
class XI. At the time of interview, the petitioner preferred 
E the medical stream but it was declined by the respondent-
school on the ground that he is ineligible for the said stream 
because of his pre-Board result. The petitioner allegedly . 
requested to admit him in any other stream as per his 
eligibility, but when the final list was prepared and displayed · 
F on 29.03.2015 ori the notice Board of the respondent-
school, the name of the petitioner was conspicuously absent 
in the said list. The contention of the petitioner is that he is 
a brilliant student who had been deprived of his right to 
education in the same school from where he had passed 
G class X. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition 
before the High Court seeking a direction to the respondent-
school to admit him in class XI. 
4. The respondents-school, on the other hand, pleaded 
H that it is a private unaided minority educational institution 
MASTER SATYAM GANDHI v. UNION TERRITORY, 
571 
CHANDIGARH [M.Y. EQBAL, J.] 
and it had started class XI and XII in the year 2011-2012 A 
after getting permission from the CBSE, upgrading the 
respondent-school to the senior ,i:.0condary school. The 
respondents' further case is that by circular dated 
13.05.2014 issued by the school, it was clearly stated that 
all students cannot be accommodated in class XI because B 
of the space constraint and availability of limited seats in 
class XI as the four sections of Class X had been reduced 
to two sections in Class XI and the short-listing was done 
on the basis of students' academic performance and grades 
in the co-scholastic areas, especially attitude and values. It C 
was further averred that the petitioner applied for admission 
in Class XI in medical stream and as per aptitude test 
conducted by the respondent-school, the petitioner had an 
aptitude for commerce. 
D 
5. The respondents' further case is that the petitioner 
had even forged the signature of his parents on the 
admission form. Further counselling for the admission to 
Class XI for the academic year 2015-2016 was held and 
since the 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.