Pooja vs State Council of Education Research and Training

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.—The petitioner has prayed for directing the respondents to consider her for admission to the Diploma in Education (D.Ed.) Course 2013-15 and grant her admission against the seat available at District Institute of Education and Training Beeswanmeel in District Sonipat. According to the petitioner, the respondents issued an admission notice inviting applications for admission in Diploma in Education (D.Ed.) Course 2013-15 for which the educational qualification was 10+2 or its equivalent with five subjects including English as one of the subjects. The last date for submission of online form was 15.7.2013 and the admission was to be made on the basis of percentage marks obtained in 10+2 examination stream-wise and the seats were divided amongst different streams like Science, Commerce and Art Vocational. However, a revised admission programme was later on published by the respondents according to which the last date of submission of application form was extended upto 22.7.2013 and the admissions were to be completed by 4.8.2013.

It is the case of the petitioner that she had passed 10+2 examination from Board of School Education, Haryana in 2013 in Arts Stream, having English and Hindi as one of the subjects, obtaining 351/500 marks. She filled up her online application form at 4:22 PM on 22.7.2013 and also paid fee. According to her, the server of the respondents refused to accept the form because it was not working properly and before 5:00 PM the website was extremely slow and non-functional inasmuch as the photograph cannot be scanned, signatures of the petitioner were not uploaded despite repeated efforts before 5:00 PM, therefore, the status of the application form of the petitioner was found to be incomplete because of the non-availability of photograph and signatures. It is submitted that the petitioner is accusing the respondents for the lapses on their part because their server was not responding and has submitted that because of the lapse on the part of the respondents her admission should not be declined. It is also submitted that there are some seats vacant, which could be offered to the petitioner. In reply filed by respondent No. 1, it is alleged that in the revised admission schedule, it was categorically laid down that "to facilitate the candidates SCERT Haryana, Gurgaon has also created facilitation centres in all DIETs, GETTIs, 122 selected Govt. Schools and in all self-financing institutes running D.Ed. Course to extent help in filling up the online format. The list of such centres is available on the website www.scertharyana.in candidates can also apply by visiting the web portal www.dedharyana.org". As per the reply, "18 District Institute of Education Training (DIETs) 122 selected Schools and 323 Self Financing Colleges in Haryana State were directed to facilitate the candidates and to extend help in filling up the online format of application form for admission to D.Ed. course from 5.7.2013 to 22.7.2013 but none of the above selected institutions has complained/intimated to the undersigned that is respondent No. 1 that the website of the respondent was not functioning with fully potential of its server on 22.7.2013 up to 5.00 PM and so on Hence, the contention of the petitioner made out in the present writ petition is quite wrong, false and fabricated. It is further stated that any other candidate except the petitioner throughout all over Haryana State has not conveyed any such or similar complaint to the office of respondent No. 1 as yet. Hence, the present petition deserves dismissal".

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have not given the quantum of load on server at that time when the petitioner has uploaded her application form which could only throw the light on the issue whether the server of the respondents was functioning well or not.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that there is no lapse on the part of the respondents rather the petitioner herself is to be blamed because not a single case has been found in the entire State of Haryana with the similar complaint. Had there been a problem in the server, the same, complaints would have been there from other parts of the State also by other candidates as well. In view thereof, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.