Rahul Kumar (Minor) vs The Union of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11977 of 2026
======================================================
Rahul Kumar (Minor) Son of Late Manoj Prasad, Resident of Village-
Khairwa, Ward No. 05, Post- Bela, Police Station/Block- Chauradano,
District- East Champaran, Bihar, being a minor of tender age, suing through
his mother and natural guardian Lalita Devi, resident of the aforesaid address.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Education,
Department of School Education and Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-
110001.
2. The Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, (an autonomous organisation under the
Ministry of Education, Government of India), through its Commissioner, B-
15, Institutional Area, Sector-62, Noida, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar
Pradesh- 201309.
3. The Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Regional Office,
Patna, Karpoori Thakur Sadan, Ashiana- Digha Road, Patna- 800025, Bihar.
4. The Principal, PM-SHRI Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Piprakothi, District-
East Champaran, Bihar- 845429.
5. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Education Department,
Government of Bihar, Vishweshraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna- 800015.
6. The District Education Officer, East Champaran, Education Department,
Government of Bihar, Motihari, District- East Champaran, Bihar.
7. The District Programme Officer (Primary Education and Samagra Shiksha),
Bihar Shiksha Pariyojana Parishad, East Champaran, Motihari, Bihar.
8. The Principal / Head of Institution, Gurukul Childrens Academy, (UDISE
Code- 10021303317, School No.- 03317, Prasvikriti Code No.
204104920211218131544), run and managed by Gurukul Educational Trust,
Bhopatpur Bajhiya (also spelt Bhupatipur), Block- Kotwa, District- East
Champaran, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Narendra Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Additional Solicitor General
: Ms. Rashmi Ranjan, Advocat
For the NVS : Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-09-2026
Heard Mr. Narendra Kumar Roy, learned Advocate

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
2/11
appearing for the petitioner, Ms. Rashmi Ranjan, learned
Advocate appearing for the State, and Mr. Siddhartha Prasad,
learned Advocate appearing for the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti.
2. The petitioner, a minor student aged about 11 years,
is pursuing the present lis through his widowed mother and
natural guardian, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this
Court for quashing of the order dated 01.07.2026 passed by
respondent No. 4, the Principal, PM-SHRI Jawahar Navodaya
Vidyalaya, Piprakothi, whereby and whereunder the
candidature/admission of the petitioner was rejected on the
ground that the school in which he had pursued his earlier
studies was allegedly an unrecognized institution.
3. The aforesaid impediment, which had come in the
way of the petitioner’s admission and was relied upon by the
Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, has now been duly clarified by the
State respondents, particularly the District Programme Officer,
East Champaran, Motihari. It has been categorically stated that
the school in which the petitioner had pursued his earlier studies
had been granted formal provisional recognition (Prasvikriti) by
the District Education Officer, East Champaran, under Section
18 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education
Act, 2009, read with Rule 11 of the Bihar Right to Education
Rules, 2011, for imparting education from Classes I to VIII,

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
3/11
vide certificate issued on 10.06.2022.
4. The aforesaid recognition was valid for a period of
three years, w.e.f. 18.12.2021 to 18.12.2024. Thus, during the
period when the petitioner was studying in Class III in the
Academic Session 2023–2024 and a substantial part of Class IV
in the Academic Session 2024–2025, the school possessed a
valid and subsisting certificate of recognition issued by the
competent district authority.
5. It has further been brought on record that, upon
expiry of the aforesaid period of recognition on 18.12.2024, the
management of the school submitted an online application
seeking renewal of recognition through the e-Sambandhan
portal of the Education Department. It has also been specifically
clarified that no order under Section 18(3) of the RTE Act, 2009,
withdrawing, cancelling or revoking the recognition of the said
institution has ever been passed by the competent authority.
6. The concerned respondent has further stated in its
detailed representation that, owing to a technical/data
discrepancy in the UDISE portal, the status of the school was
inadvertently reflected as that of an unrecognized school. Upon
detection of the said discrepancy, the school management
submitted Form A01 on 25.09.2025 before the district
authorities seeking rectification of the UDISE database.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
4/11
Pursuant thereto, necessary corrections were carried out and, as
per the updated UDISE portal records for the Academic Year
2026–2027, the status of the said school is now correctly
reflected as an operational, private unaided and recognized
school for Classes I to VIII.
7. From the materials available on record and the
averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of
respondent No. 6, it further appears that the administrative
processing of recognition/renewal through the e-Sambandhan
portal and the subsequent synchronization of data on the UDISE
portal are essentially matters of internal procedure between the
Education Department and the school administration. Such
procedural or technical discrepancies cannot, in the facts of the
present case, efface or invalidate the recognition which had
admittedly been granted to the institution during the period
when the petitioner was pursuing his studies therein.
8. Coming to the petitioner’s selection for admission,
it is not in dispute that the petitioner had applied for admission
to Class VI under the OBC Rural quota and was duly declared
successful in the selection process conducted for admission to
Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya. It is also not in dispute that the
petitioner qualified in the entrance examination on his own
merit, securing an aggregate score of 96.25 marks, comprising

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
5/11
47.50 marks in Mental Ability, 25.00 marks in Arithmetic and
23.75 marks in Language, and obtained an overall rank of 72.
9. The aforesaid score and rank clearly demonstrate
the merit of the petitioner and his successful performance in the
selection process. However, despite being declared successful,
the petitioner was denied admission solely on account of the
previous school in which he had studied having been
erroneously reflected as an unrecognized school.
10. When the matter was taken up on 31.08.2026, this
Court requested the learned Advocate appearing for the
Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, to obtain
instructions and apprise the Court of the present status of the
petitioner’s admission. Today, Mr. Prasad submits that, upon
publication of the result, the successful candidates were called
for admission and the admission process has been completed. So
far as the petitioner is concerned, he had applied for admission
to Class VI and, as per the applicable regulations, a total of 80
students are required to be admitted. All the available seats have
already been filled up on the basis of merit and, therefore, no
vacancy is presently available.
11. Mr. Prasad, learned Advocate appearing for the
Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, though does not dispute the stand
taken by respondent No. 6 with regard to the recognition status

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
6/11
of the school, however, he submits that, in view of the fact that
all the seats have already been filled up in accordance with the
prescribed procedure and merit position, it would be difficult for
the Samiti to accommodate the petitioner at this stage. He
further submits that the entrance examination was conducted by
the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and the
result has accordingly been published. Therefore, according to
him, the CBSE would be in a position to apprise this Court as to
the appropriate manner in which the petitioner may be
accommodated against a suitable seat.
12. Having carefully considered the submissions
advanced by learned Advocates for the respective parties and
upon perusal of the materials available on record, this Court is
of the prima facie opinion that the petitioner cannot be blamed
for the circumstances which have resulted in denial of his
admission.
13. The merit of the petitioner is clearly borne out
from his score card. He secured 96.25 marks and obtained an
overall rank of 72 in the entrance examination. Had the issue
relating to the status of his previous school not intervened, there
appears to be no reason why, having regard to his merit and
rank, the petitioner would not have been admitted to the
Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
7/11
14. The erroneous reflection of the name/status of the
school in the UDISE portal as an unrecognized institution
cannot, in the facts of the present case, be attributed to the
petitioner or his mother. The record placed before this Court
indicates that the discrepancy was attributable to an error on the
part of the concerned departmental authorities, which was
subsequently rectified. More importantly, it has specifically
been clarified by the competent authority that the school had not
been declared unrecognized during the period when the
petitioner was pursuing his studies therein.
15. A minor child, aged about 11 years, cannot be
made to suffer for an administrative or technical lapse which
was neither within his control nor attributable to him or his
natural guardian. The petitioner had duly pursued his studies in
the said institution, participated in the selection process,
qualified the entrance examination on merit and secured an
overall rank of 72. Having successfully crossed all these stages,
denial of admission to him merely on account of an erroneous
entry in the departmental database would, in the considered
opinion of this Court, result in manifest prejudice to the
petitioner.
16. The Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the
petitioner is a minor child, aged about 11 years, who is pursuing

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
8/11
his academic career at a formative stage of his life. At such a
tender age, a child cannot reasonably be expected to understand,
much less rectify, the intricacies of recognition of an educational
institution, renewal of such recognition, or the correctness of
entries made on governmental portals such as UDISE. These are
matters entirely beyond the control, knowledge and
understanding of a minor student. Having studied in the
institution under a recognition which was granted by the
competent authority, the petitioner cannot be visited with an
adverse consequence merely because of a subsequent
administrative or technical discrepancy in the official records.
17. The right of a child to pursue education cannot be
rendered illusory by an administrative lapse for which the child
bears no responsibility. The Court is required to adopt a child-
centric approach while examining a matter where the academic
future of a minor student is at stake. At this formative stage,
even a short interruption in the continuity of education may
have consequences extending beyond the immediate academic
year. The Court, therefore, is of the considered view that the
petitioner’s legitimate academic interest and the need to protect
him from the consequences of an error committed at the
administrative level deserve due consideration.
18. It is equally significant that the petitioner did not

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
9/11
secure his claim for admission by seeking any relaxation in the
eligibility criteria or by seeking any concession in the selection
process. He participated in the prescribed entrance examination
and secured 96.25 marks with an overall rank of 72 on his own
merit. Thus, what the petitioner seeks is not any preferential
treatment, but only that he should not be deprived of the benefit
of a selection which he otherwise legitimately earned, on
account of an error in the official record which was neither
caused nor contributed to by him or his natural guardian.
19. In the considered opinion of this Court, the
principle that an innocent child should not suffer for an
administrative lapse assumes greater significance where the
lapse has occurred at the level of the official record and has
subsequently been acknowledged and rectified by the competent
authority. The interests of the institution and the sanctity of the
admission process undoubtedly deserve protection; however,
those considerations cannot be allowed to operate to the
detriment of a minor student who has demonstrated his merit
and whose eligibility was otherwise not in dispute.
20. This Court is also conscious of the fact that the
Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti is required to conduct the
admission process strictly in accordance with the applicable
rules and regulations. The decision taken by the Samiti cannot,

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
10/11
therefore, be faulted merely because it relied upon the status of
the school as reflected on the official portal at the relevant point
of time. However, the petitioner cannot be made to bear the
consequences of an error or discrepancy for which he is in no
manner responsible.
21. In such circumstances, a balancing exercise is
required to be undertaken so as to protect the petitioner’s
legitimate claim without disturbing the admissions already made
in accordance with the prescribed procedure. This Court,
therefore, is of the considered opinion that the Secretary,
Ministry of Education (Department of School Education and
Literacy), Government of India, the Navodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti, the Central Board of Secondary Education and all other
concerned authorities must deliberate upon the matter forthwith
and work out a viable and lawful solution.
22. If necessary, and subject to the applicable rules
and approval of the competent authority, a supernumerary seat
in Class VI may be created for the petitioner, so that he may be
admitted to the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya and pursue his
studies without any further impediment.
23. The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken and
completed within two weeks from today, keeping in view the
fact that the petitioner is a minor child and any further delay in

Patna High Court CWJC No.11977 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
11/11
securing his admission would cause serious prejudice to his
education and academic interests.
24. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the
present writ petition stands allowed.
25. A copy of this order shall be handed
over/communicated to the learned Advocate appearing for the
Union of India, as also the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti and all
other concerned authorities for its immediate compliance and
necessary action.

(Harish Kumar, J)
Utkarsh.k/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 01.09.2026
Transmission Date NA