The Delhi High Court, while hearing the matter related to the admission of two children of Delhi University, has made it clear that no student will be able to swap courses with each other.
Image Credit source: PTI
Delhi High Court Delhi UniversityDU) refused to allow two successful candidates to interchange their chosen courses and seats for admission to M.Sc., but asked the authorities to look into their complaint as a separate case. Justice Vibhu Bakhru also rejected their claim that this year’s Common Seat Allocation System (CSAS) was unconstitutional and said that the request for change of seats by the petitioners is not acceptable in the context of the allocation system.
The court said in an order, this court does not find any ground to interfere with the CSAS, and has already stated that the petitioners have no locus standi to request relief. There has been no favoritism with any student. This Court directs the Respondents (University of Delhi and St. Stephen’s College) to consider the same as a separate case.
The court said that the challenge raised by the petitioners to the CSAS is baseless and there is no reasonable ground to believe that it is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 (equality before law) or Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution. is a violation.
Demand to change first preference
The petitioner students had performed exceptionally well in the Common University Entrance Test (CUET). He sought to change his first preference while accepting admission after realizing it was wrong, but the authorities refused to allow any change. After this he turned to the court.
DU said that as per the applicable policy, a candidate is not allowed to change the seat after securing admission in the course and college of his/her first preference. Justice said that the court is also of the view that if the respondents (DU and St. Stephen’s College) consider the requests of the petitioners, it will not affect the rights of other students. The court clarified that if the petitioners’ requests are considered, it will not set a precedent.
(with language input)
: Language Inputs