POOJA AS GUARDIAN OF BABY DEVANSHI JAISAWAR vs AADHARSHILA VIDYAPEETH & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 25.03.2026 + LPA 810/2024, CM APPL. 48040/2024, CM APPL. 48041/2024 & CM APPL. 66934/2025 POOJA AS GUARDIAN OF BABY DEVANSHI JAISAWAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aayush Agarwala and Mr. Vipul Singh, Advocates. versus AADHARSHILA VIDYAPEETH & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Jyoti Taneja, Adv for R-1. Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, PC, GNCTD with Ms. Chandrika Sachdeva and Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA TEJAS KARIA, J. (Oral) CM APPL. 48039/2024 (Delay) 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Parties and perused the averments made in the instant Application. 2. The prayer made is allowed and the delay of 72 days in filing the present Appeal stands condoned. 3. Accordingly, the Application is disposed of. LPA 810/2024 4. The present intra court Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 08.05.2024 (“Impugned Judgment”) passed in W.P.(C) Signature Not Verified LPA 810/2024 Page 1 of 14 Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:02.04.2026 15:40:04 13354/2023 (“Writ Petition”), whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition relying upon the judgment of this Court in Ankit Kumar v. GNCTD, Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:3161. 5. The Appellant has filed this Appeal specifically to challenge the conclusions reached in Paragraph Nos. 5 to 8 of the Impugned Judgment. The Impugned Judgment observed that although Respondent No. 1 – School lacked a legitimate basis for refusing admission to the Appellant’s ward, the expiration of the relevant Academic Year precluded the Court from issuing an order for admission in the subsequent Academic Year. The Appellant maintains that she has been unjustly penalized as her Writ Petition was filed within th