The High Court of Chhattisgarh in Mayank Shukla vs. State of Chhattisgarh held that where the student was Allowed to Keep Terms (ATKT) 1st chance and accordingly promoted to the second semester cannot be debarred from appearing in second-semester examinations.
The High Court of Rajasthan in Kashish Prajapati D/o Hari Chand Prajapati vs Union of India held that petitioner, an eligible candidate, cannot be debarred from admission by invalidating her caste certificate. The court additionally directed the respondent to admit the petitioner to the special round of counselling to be conducted by Central Seat Allocation Board (CSAB)-2021, MNIT, Jaipur.
The Delhi High Court in Himanshu vs University of Delhi & others dismissing the petition denied migration request of petitioner-student for delay in filing application and also held that migration was not a vested right to be claimed in such a circumstance.
The Delhi High Court clubbing two writ petitions pertaining to the same matter in Yatendra Singh Vs Indira Gandhi Institute of Physical Education and Sports Sciences (IGIPESS) & Anr and Vivek Vats Vs Indira Gandhi Institute of Physical Education and Sports Sciences & Anr., held that the petitioners should not suffer owing to the respondent institutes fallacious merit list and were entitled to continue their course without any disturbance.
The Bombay High Court in Aarti Harish Bhandari vs Shree L R Tiwari College of Law directed the respondent college to clearly specify mandatory eligibility criteria for admission to the course at the beginning of the admission process and not jeopardize the right of the student for non-compliance by the institution.
The Madras High Court in A. Sriram Khanna vs State of Tamil Nadu applying the principle of equity held that the petitioner was entitled for refund of 80% fees from the college since the same seat allotted to him, upon cancellation of admission, was allotted to a different student.
Allahabad High Court in Ram Avatar Kalyani Devi Kanya Mahavidyalay Thru Manager & Ors Vs. State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Higher Education Lucknow & Ors.– Misc. Single No. – 14258 of 2021 and two other related cases called out and sought immediate action by the State Government on the fraudulent practice adopted by colleges wherein they recover penalties imposed by the affiliated University on them through students.
The Central Information Commission in Ganesh Sharma vs. Department of Post established the petitioner-student’s right to seek his own answer sheet through the Right to Information (RTI) application.
he High Court of Jammu and Kashmir in Fallahi Aam Trust vs State of JK and Others held that the students of the petitioner’s trust to be allowed to appear for the examination conducted by J&K State Board of School Kashmir Division from class 5 and 10.
The District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission in Anisha Saini D/O Angrej Singh vs Pyramid E-Service held that the complainant who had applied for abroad studies through the disputant e-service provider, rightly alleged agitation against the opposite party for deficiency in service and directed the opposite party for the refund of her fees.
The Calcutta High Court in Visva Bharati and another Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors — W.P.A. No. 13553 of 2021 set aside rustication orders of three students passed by the special enquiry committee. The students were rusticated for three years for breaking the seal on the chamber of a professor and for causing disorder in the University. The court observed that students were used as a front by the vested political interests from outside the University.