On Tuesday, January 19, 2021, Delhi High Court directed DU to decide on the representation of an applicant seeking admission under sports category, who was “arbitrarily denied” admission for the academic session 2020-21.
On Tuesday, January 19, Delhi High Court allotted a period of two weeks for Delhi University to decide upon the admission of a sports category applicant, who on an account of uploading his provisional sports certificate on the place of an original one was considered ineligible for admission by the varsity.
The entreaty stated that the University of Delhi has “arbitrarily denied accepting the provisional Sports Certificate of the petitioner, failing to take into consideration that outbreak of Corona (Covid-19) pandemic and unprecedented lockdown, thereby depriving him of the opportunity to take admission in the Undergraduate Course under the Sports Category for the academic session 2020-2021“
The petitioner, Mr. Naman Upadhyay was represented by advocates Amit Kumar Sharma, Satyam Singh Rajput and Shriram Tiwari in the matter. The court stated that there was no negligence or procrastination on the part of the petitioner and he made every possible attempt to obtain the required Sports Certificate, however was restricted by the unprecedented pandemic environment.
The plea mentioned that, “the applicant had uploaded the required Provisional Sports Certificate, but the same was not accepted by the respondent, consequently declaring him ineligible”. It further mentioned that, “due to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown, the printing of Sports Certificates could not be carried out by the government of Madhya Pradesh. But, keeping the future of students in mind, the government provided a Provisional Sports Certificate to the eligible students.”
As per the petitioner he approached the varsity grievance committee but did not get any satisfactory solution for the problem. Justice Prateek Jalan’s bench after hearing the petition, directed the Delhi University to decide the representation within a period of two weeks alongside granting liberty to the petitioner to re-approach the court if the time period is exceeded. The Court held the university responsible for arbitrarily denying admission to the petitioner, without providing any valid reasons or justifications for such denial of admissions for the undergraduate course. The court also pointed towards the laxity of the Grievance Committee of the University.
Feature Image Credits: Du Beat Archives