High Court · 2025

Petitioner :- C/M Smt. Kevala Devi Inter College, Patapgarh Thru. Manager Virendra Singh Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prateek Shrivastava,Avinash Singh Vishen Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

1. Heard Mr. Avinash Singh Vishen and Mr. Prateek Shrivastava learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of district magistrate concerned and the sub divisional magistrate filed today are taken on record.

2. In pursuance of directions issued earlier, Mr. Shiv Sahay Awasthi currently posted as District Magistrate Pratapgarh and Mr. Tanveer Ahmad currently posted as Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh are present before this Court.

3. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to concerned authorities to allot examination center to the petitioner college for U.P. Board Examination 2025 and in the alternative to decide representation/objection dated 13th November, 2024.

4. Earlier this Court on 13th February, 2025 had passed following order:- "1. Counter affidavit to supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

2. As per short counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite parties, it appears from Annexure SCA-1 dated 25.02.2025 issued by the District Inspector of Schools, Pratapgarh that since petitioner-institution was not recommended by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patti, Pratapgarh, the District Level Committee in its meeting held on 18.11.2024 did not recommend petitioner-institution for being made an examination centre for the High School and Intermediate Examinations-2025.

3. However, a perusal of Annexure-8 to writ petition indicates reply dated 23.11.2024 provided to petitioner under Right to Information Act, 2005 issued by Sub-Judicial Magistrate, Patti, Pratapgarh that petitioner- institution was in fact recommended for being made a Centre.

4. Clearly there appears to be contradiction in the documents supplied by opposite parties themselves.

5. In view thereof, since specific instructions have not been provided to learned State Counsel, list this case on 17.02.2024, as fresh.

6. The District Magistrate, Pratapgarh as well as Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patti, Pratapgarh shall appear in person before this Court on the next date of listing along with relevant records in order to dispel the contradictions."

5. In pursuance of such directions, the concerned officials are present and have also filed their affidavits as indicated herein above.

6. Mr. Rahul Shukla learned State Counsel on that basis has adverted to the government order dated 17th September, 2024 to submit that in terms of provisions of the aforesaid government order, once the school concerned uploads its details on the website, such details are required to be verified by the Sub Divisional Magistrate at the tehsil level committee whereafter the details of verification are uploaded. Thereafter in terms of paragraph 7 of the government order, tabulation regarding merit points obtained by a particular institution is also prepared for submission and decision thereupon by the district level committee. It is submitted that in terms thereof, the tabulation also with regard to petitioner institution was done and was placed before the district level committee which however inadvertently noticed that the Sub Divisional Magistrate did not recommend petitioner's institution although such a recommendation was in fact made.

7. He has also adverted to paragraph 9 of the government order to submit that as per paragraph 4 (Anga), schools within particular radius, in the present case being 0 to 7 kilometers radius is required to be chosen with a minimum number of 250 students subject to maximum of 2000 students.

8. It is therefore submitted that in terms of such a chart being prepared, within 0 to 7 kilometers radius, only two institutes namely Rajkiya Balika Inter College Aspura Devsara and Veena Pani Inter College Mujahi Bazar under the unaided/self finance category was selected. He further submits that petitioner's institute also comes under unaided/self finance category and a comparison of two schools will indicate that the one chosen got merit quality points 285 as compared to 130 of petitioner with number of girl students also being 524 as compared to 71 of petitioner's institution. It is thus submitted that the chosen school not only had higher quality points but also higher number of girl students and was therefore chosen as a centre in terms of paragraph 4 of the government order.

8. Learned counsel for petitioner has refuted submissions committee incorrectly recorded advanced by learned counsel for opposite parites with submission that once the opposite parties have admitted that the district recommendation of sub divisional magistrate, there was no occasion for them to have considered the petitioner's institution which in fact was not done and therefore the entire decision making process was faulty. It is submitted that in terms of paragraph 9 of the government order, the software itself removed petitioner's institution from the proposed list of institutions and therefore the recommendation pertaining to petitioner institution was in fact never considered by the district level committee.

9. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that the district level committee has rejected petitioner's candidature only on account of premise that it was not recommended by the sub divisional magistrate or tehsil level committee whereas such a recommendation in fact was made. It may also be possible that the tabulation chart of petitioner's institution may not have been considered by the district level committee. Nonetheless at this stage where it is submitted that practical examinations pertaining to the Board are almost over and the theory examinations are due to commence from 24th February, 2025, this Court has endeavoured to decide the matter on merits as well.

10. It is evident from the averments made in paragraph 8 of the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the district magistrate concerned dated 17th February, 2025 that within 0 to 7 kilometers radius, only two institutes as indicated herein above have been chosen as centres. The comparative chart pertaining to petitioner's institution and Veena Pani Inter College are also indicated in the said paragraph which makes it evident that Veena Pani Inter College not only higher merit quality points but also a much higher strength of girl students at 524 as compared to 71 of petitioner's institution.

11. Paragraph 4 (Kha) of the government order clearly indicates that upon completion of all the relevant criteria, priority would be given to those institutes which have a higher number of girl students.

12. In the present case, it is evident and admitted that Veena Pani Inter College not only higher merit quality points but also much higher strength of girl students.

13. In view thereof, this Court does not find any occasion to interfere with the decision so taken.

14. Considering aforesaid discussions, the petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. Parties to bear their own cost. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 prabhat PRABHAT KUMAR PRABHAT KUMAR PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

Petitioner :- C/M Smt. Kevala Devi Inter College, Patapgarh Thru. Manager Virendra Singh Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prateek Shrivastava,Avinash Singh Vishen Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

1. Heard Mr. Avinash Singh Vishen and Mr. Prateek Shrivastava learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of district magistrate concerned and the sub divisional magistrate filed today are taken on record.

2. In pursuance of directions issued earlier, Mr. Shiv Sahay Awasthi currently posted as District Magistrate Pratapgarh and Mr. Tanveer Ahmad currently posted as Sub Divisional Magistrate Tehsil Patti, District Pratapgarh are present before this Court.

3. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to concerned authorities to allot examination center to the petitioner college for U.P. Board Examination 2025 and in the alternative to decide representation/objection dated 13th November, 2024.

4. Earlier this Court on 13th February, 2025 had passed following order:- "1. Counter affidavit to supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

2. As per short counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite parties, it appears from Annexure SCA-1 dated 25.02.2025 issued by the District Inspector of Schools, Pratapgarh that since petitioner-institution was not recommended by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patti, Pratapgarh, the District Level Committee in its meeting held on 18.11.2024 did not recommend petitioner-institution for being made an examination centre for the High School and Intermediate Examinations-2025.

3. However, a perusal of Annexure-8 to writ petition indicates reply dated 23.11.2024 provided to petitioner under Right to Information Act, 2005 issued by Sub-Judicial Magistrate, Patti, Pratapgarh that petitioner- institution was in fact recommended for being made a Centre.

4. Clearly there appears to be contradiction in the documents supplied by opposite parties themselves.

5. In view thereof, since specific instructions have not been provided to learned State Counsel, list this case on 17.02.2024, as fresh.

6. The District Magistrate, Pratapgarh as well as Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patti, Pratapgarh shall appear in person before this Court on the next date of listing along with relevant records in order to dispel the contradictions."

5. In pursuance of such directions, the concerned officials are present and have also filed their affidavits as indicated herein above.

6. Mr. Rahul Shukla learned State Counsel on that basis has adverted to the government order dated 17th September, 2024 to submit that in terms of provisions of the aforesaid government order, once the school concerned uploads its details on the website, such details are required to be verified by the Sub Divisional Magistrate at the tehsil level committee whereafter the details of verification are uploaded. Thereafter in terms of paragraph 7 of the government order, tabulation regarding merit points obtained by a particular institution is also prepared for submission and decision thereupon by the district level committee. It is submitted that in terms thereof, the tabulation also with regard to petitioner institution was done and was placed before the district level committee which however inadvertently noticed that the Sub Divisional Magistrate did not recommend petitioner's institution although such a recommendation was in fact made.

7. He has also adverted to paragraph 9 of the government order to submit that as per paragraph 4 (Anga), schools within particular radius, in the present case being 0 to 7 kilometers radius is required to be chosen with a minimum number of 250 students subject to maximum of 2000 students.

8. It is therefore submitted that in terms of such a chart being prepared, within 0 to 7 kilometers radius, only two institutes namely Rajkiya Balika Inter College Aspura Devsara and Veena Pani Inter College Mujahi Bazar under the unaided/self finance category was selected. He further submits that petitioner's institute also comes under unaided/self finance category and a comparison of two schools will indicate that the one chosen got merit quality points 285 as compared to 130 of petitioner with number of girl students also being 524 as compared to 71 of petitioner's institution. It is thus submitted that the chosen school not only had higher quality points but also higher number of girl students and was therefore chosen as a centre in terms of paragraph 4 of the government order.

8. Learned counsel for petitioner has refuted submissions committee incorrectly recorded advanced by learned counsel for opposite parites with submission that once the opposite parties have admitted that the district recommendation of sub divisional magistrate, there was no occasion for them to have considered the petitioner's institution which in fact was not done and therefore the entire decision making process was faulty. It is submitted that in terms of paragraph 9 of the government order, the software itself removed petitioner's institution from the proposed list of institutions and therefore the recommendation pertaining to petitioner institution was in fact never considered by the district level committee.

9. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that the district level committee has rejected petitioner's candidature only on account of premise that it was not recommended by the sub divisional magistrate or tehsil level committee whereas such a recommendation in fact was made. It may also be possible that the tabulation chart of petitioner's institution may not have been considered by the district level committee. Nonetheless at this stage where it is submitted that practical examinations pertaining to the Board are almost over and the theory examinations are due to commence from 24th February, 2025, this Court has endeavoured to decide the matter on merits as well.

10. It is evident from the averments made in paragraph 8 of the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the district magistrate concerned dated 17th February, 2025 that within 0 to 7 kilometers radius, only two institutes as indicated herein above have been chosen as centres. The comparative chart pertaining to petitioner's institution and Veena Pani Inter College are also indicated in the said paragraph which makes it evident that Veena Pani Inter College not only higher merit quality points but also a much higher strength of girl students at 524 as compared to 71 of petitioner's institution.

11. Paragraph 4 (Kha) of the government order clearly indicates that upon completion of all the relevant criteria, priority would be given to those institutes which have a higher number of girl students.

12. In the present case, it is evident and admitted that Veena Pani Inter College not only higher merit quality points but also much higher strength of girl students.

13. In view thereof, this Court does not find any occasion to interfere with the decision so taken.

14. Considering aforesaid discussions, the petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. Parties to bear their own cost. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 prabhat PRABHAT KUMAR PRABHAT KUMAR PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench