Rajasthan High Court: Child’s Admission Can’t Be Denied Under RTE Act On Technical Count That Aadhar Card Wasn’t Carrying Residency Ward Number

The Rajasthan High Court remarked that a fundamental right, especially when it unequivocally accrues in favour of a citizen, cannot be tossed even on the basis of the procedural grounds or technicalities.

Update: 2025-09-12 12:45 GMT

 Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court held that an admission to school cannot be denied to a child under the Right to Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) merely on technical count that Aadhar Card was not carrying residency the number of his residency ward.

The Jaipur Bench held thus in a Writ Petition seeking to grant admission to a child under the RTE Act on free seats in a private school.

A Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed, “Once the petitioner has been selected for getting admission in respondent No.4-private school, under a lottery draw, his application cannot be rejected merely on a technical count that his Aadhar Card was not carrying the number of his residency Ward. The respondents could have asked the petitioner to furnish a documentary proof with regard to his residential Ward, instead of rejecting his application.”

The Bench added that such action of the authorities was quite unjustified and the same is not tenable in the eyes of law.

Advocate M. Naseer Khan represented the Petitioner while Dy. GC. Devansh Sharma represented the Respondents.

Factual Background

The young minor Petitioner through his natural guardian father knocked the doors of the High Court to enforce his right to education, as guaranteed under Article 21-A of the Constitution of India. He challenged the action of the Chief Block Education Officer by which his application was rejected. He sought direction to the Respondents to give him admission under RTE seat in the Respondent-private school namely “The Vardhman International School”.

The Petitioner had filed an application for getting admission in the said school and also attached his Aadhar Card wherein the ward number was not mentioned. On this ground, his application was rejected by the Respondents. Subsequently, an email was sent and the documents were uploaded in the form of Appendix wherein ward number was mentioned as residence of the Petitioner and the same was duly attested by a Gazetted Officer. However, the said document was overlooked by the school and the same was not considered for allowing the Petitioner to get admission.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, emphasised, “Right to Education should help the student, not only to develop his capacities but also to understand his own highest interest.”

The Court was of the opinion that once the Respondents have extended the date for verification of documents and the Petitioner has submitted his correct document with regard to his Ward, the Respondents were supposed to consider the said document for the purpose of granting admission to him and inclusion of his name in the lottery process, but the Respondents miserably failed to do so.

“The right of the petitioner, under Article 21-A of the Constitution of India and under Section 12 of the Act of 2009 cannot be curtailed merely on the account of technicalities or any other procedural irregularities. Indisputably, the right of the petitioner to be admitted in respondent No.4, i.e., private school in the EWS Category invariably flows from the Constitution of India along-with statutory mandate envisaged in the Act of 2009”, it noted.

The Court said that a fundamental right, especially when it unequivocally accrues in favour of a citizen, cannot be tossed even on the basis of the procedural grounds or technicalities.

“The respondents are directed to admit the petitioner the respondent No.4-private school within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order”, it directed.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition and directed the Respondents to admit the Petitioner.

Cause Title- Master Daivik Rangwani v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:RJ-JP:35358)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates M. Naseer Khan and Rizwan Ahmed.

Respondents: Dy. GC. Devansh Sharma, Advocates Bhavya Kala, and Udit Purohit.

Click here to read/download the Judgment

Tags:    

Similar News