[eebill] FW: HC NOTICE TO DELHI GOVERNMENT (Ashok Agarwal's - re
NIOS)
Gita Dewan Verma
purplepapaya36 at hotmail.com
Sun Sep 12 12:45:10 CDT 2004
>From: "Ashok" <socialjur at mantraonline.com>
>To: "huright" <huright at vsnl.com>, "Hind Mazdoor Sabha HQ" <mki at vsnl.com>,
>"Gurcharan Das" <gurcharandas at vsnl.com>, "GOOGLE"
><news-feedback at google.com>, "Gita Diwan Verma TownPlanner"
><purplepapaya36 at hotmail.com>
>Subject: HC NOTICE TO DELHI GOVERNMENT
>Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 17:35:27 +0530
>
>Delhi High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice C.K. Mahajan) today asked the
>government of delhi to reply by 21.09.2004 to the writ petition challenging
>the validity of the circular dated 19.08.2004 of delhi government laying
>down arbitrary conditions for admission of class X passed students from
>NIOS in class XI in government schools. That more than Ten Thousands
>students who have passed class X from NIOS and have secured marks less than
>55% aggregate are denied admission in government schools because of the
>arbitrary conditions of the circular. The case in now listed for
>21.09.2004 for hearing. Copy of writ petition is attached.
>
>Ashok Agarwal
>Advocate
>03.09.2004
>9811101923
>
>
>IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
>W.P. (C) NO. 14544 OF 2004
>
>
>
>
>IN THE MATTER OF :
>
>Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
>
>
>
> And
>
>IN THE MATTER OF:
>
>Failure on the part of the National Capital Territory of Delhi to provide
>admission to the petitioner in class X in Govt. Boys Senior Secondary
>School No.1, Sagarpur, New Delhi-110046 or Govt. Boys Senior Secondary
>School No. 2, Sagarpur, New Delhi-110045 or in any other govt. school
>nearby the residence of the petitioner.
>
>
>
>And
>
>IN THE MATTER OF:
>
>Impugned circular dated 19.08.2004 of the respondents whereby the
>respondents have laid down the conditions for the admission of N.I.O.S.
>students in class X government schools in Delhi which are absolutely
>arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and tentamounts to violation of
>right to education as guaranteed to petitioner and other like students
>under Articles 14, 21, 21A , 39 (f) 41, 51A of the Constitution of India
>read with Delhi School Education Act, 1973, UN Convention on Rights of the
>Child (1989) and National Charter for Children 2003 .
>
>
>
>And
>
>
>
>IN THE MATTER OF:
>
>(i) Constitution of India
>
>(ii) Delhi School Education Act,
>
> 1973.
>
>(iii) UN Convention on Rights of
>
> Child (1989)
>
> (iv) National Charter for
>
> Children 2003.
>
>(v) National Policy on Education
>
> 1986 as modified in 1992.
>
>
>
>And
>
>IN THE MATTER OF:
>
> Master Vikas Kumar Bhadoriya (minor),
>
>through his father Sh. Rishi Raj Bhadoriya,
>
>r/o RZ-46C, Gali No 6B,
>
>West Sagarpur,
>
> New Delhi-110045
> .. Petitioner
>
>
>
>Versus
>
>
>
>1. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
>
>through its Chief Secretary,
>
>Delhi Secretariat,
>
>I.P. Estate,
>
>Delhi-110006.
>
>
>
>2. The Director of Education,
>
>Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi,
>
>Old Secretariat Building,
>
>Delhi- 110054.
>
>
>
>3. The Principal ,
>
> Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School No. 1
>
> Sagarpur, New Delhi-110046
>
>
>
>
>
>4. The Principal ,
>
> Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School No. 2
>
> Sagarpur, New Delhi-110045.
>..Respondents
>
>
>
>
>
>To,
>
>
>
>THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI AND HIS
>COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE SAID HIGH COURT__________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>The humble petition of the petitioner above named: -
>
>
>
>
>
>MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
>
>
>
>
>
>1. The present writ petition is directed against the
>failure on the part of the Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi,
>hereinafter referred as respondent Nos 1 & 2, to provide admission to the
>petitioner in class XI in Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School No. 1
>Sagarpur, New Delhi-110046 or Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School No. 2
>Sagarpur, New Delhi-110045 or in any other govt. school nearby the
>residence of the petitioner. The present writ petition is also directed
>against the impugned circular dated 19.8.2004 of the respondents 1 &2
>whereby the respondents have laid down conditions for admission for
>N.I.O.S. students in class XI in the Govt. Schools in Delhi which are
>arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional, violative of the fundamental
>right to education of the petitioner and other like students guaranteed to
>them under Articles 14, 21, 21A, 39 (f), 41 & 51A of the Constitution of
>India read with Delhi School Education Act, 1973, UN Convention on Rights
>of the Child (1989) National Charter for Children 2003, National Policy on
>Education 1986 as modified in 1992.
>
>
>
> A true copy of the said impugned circular dated
>19.08.2004 is enclosed hereto as ANNEXURE-A.
>
>
>
>2. The petitioner by this writ petition has raised the
>following vital questions of law of general and public importance for
>determination by this Hon'ble Court:-
>
>
>
>
>
>i) Whether the conditions of admission for N.I.O.S. students in
>class XI in the govt. schools of Delhi as laid down in the impugned
>circular dated 19.08.2004 are arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional,
>opposed to public policy, against public interest, violative of Articles
>14, 21, 21A, 39 (f), 41 & 51A of the Constitution of India?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>ii). Whether the respondents are obliged in law to provide admission
>to the petitioner in class XI in Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School No. 1
>Sagarpur, New Delhi-110046 or Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School No. 2
>Sagarpur, New Delhi-110045 or in any other govt. school nearby the
>residence of the petitioner?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>3. The facts of the case as so far as relevant for the
>purpose of the present writ petition are given as under.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>4. That Master Vikas Kumar Bhadoriya, petitioner
>herein, has studied class I to V in M.C.D. Primary School No. 2, Sagarpur,
>New Delhi. Thereafter he got admission in class VI in Govt. Boys Senior
>Secondary School No. 2, Sagarpur, New Delhi and continued his studies in
>the said school till academic session 2002-2003 when he appeared in class
>IX school examination and failed.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 5. The petitioner has appeared in the Secondary
>examination 2003-2004 conducted by National Institute of Open Schooling,
>Govt. of India and passed class X. The results were declared on
>11.08.2004.
>
>
>
>
>
>6. That after having passed class X examination, the
>petitioner obtained marks statements and migration certificate from the
>National Institute of Open Schooling and thereafter, approached the
>Principal, Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School No. 1, Sagarpur, New
>Delhi-110046 on 18.08.2004 and requested for his admission in class XI.
>The Principal initially agreed to admit him but immediately thereafter
>refused to give admission without assigning any valid reason thereof.
>However, the said Principal asked the petitioner to approach the Deputy
>Director, South-West to get his approval for admission.
>
>
>
> True copies of the marks-statement and migration
>certificate issued by NIOS are enclosed here to as ANNEXURE- B & C
>Respectively.
>
>
>
>
>
>7. That the petitioner on 18.08.2004 itself approached
>the Deputy Director of Education, South-West and requested him to direct
>the Principal of said school No. 1 or No. 2 at Sagarpur, New Delhi to admit
>him in class XI. The Education Officer made an endorsement on the
>application requesting the Principal of G. B.S.S. School No. 2 to consider
>the case of the petitioner for admission, which was refused. Thereafter,
>the petitioner also approached to the Principal of G. B.S.S. School No. 1,
>Sagarpur, New Delhi for admission but the said principal also refused to
>give admission to him.
>
>
>
>
>
>A true copy of the application with endorsement dated 18.08.2004 is
>enclosed hereto as ANNEXURE- D and English translation of the application
>is also enclosed hereto as ANNEXURE-D1.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>8. That the petitioner has been denied admission in
>class XI by both G.B.S.S. School No. 1 and G.B.S.S. School No. 2 at
>Sagarpur, New Delhi without any justification inspite of repeated requests.
> The petitioner is legally entitled to the admission in class XI either
>in G.B.S.S. School No. 2 or in G.B.S.S. School No. 1 or in ay other
>government school nearby his residence in the current academic year
>2004-2005.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>9. The petitioner in the aforesaid facts and
>circumstances served the respondents with a legal notice dated 24.08.2004
>thereby demanding admission in any of the aforesaid govt. schools in class
>XI.
>
>
>
>
>
> A true copy of the said legal notice dated
>24.08.2004 is enclosed hereto ANNEXURE-E.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>10. The petitioner submits that he met the Deputy
>Director, South-West on 24.08.2004 and personally handed him over a copy of
>the aforesaid legal notice dated 24.08.2004 and again requested him to
>ensure his admission in G.B.S.S. School No. 1 or No.2, Sagarpur or in any
>other Govt. school nearby his residence. The Deputy Director after going
>through the contents of said legal notice again denied admission in the
>school saying that in view of the impugned circular dated 19.08.2004
>(Annexure-A) the petitioner could not be granted admission as the
>petitioner was not fulfilling all the conditions including condition that
>he should have acquired at least 55% marks in aggregate in class X
>examination as laid down in the said circular.
>
>
>
>
>
>11. The petitioner submits that it would be useful to
>reproduce herein the impugned circular dated 19.08.2004:
>
>
>
>
>
>"GOVT. OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI
>
>DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION
>
>OFFICE OF ADDL. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (SCHOOL)
>
>OLD SECTT: DELHI
>
>
>
>No.F.DE.23(28)Sch.Br./2004/12757-13756 dated: 19.8.2004
>
>
>
>CIRCULAR
>
>
>
> In continuation to Department Circular No.
>F.DE.23(28)Sch.Br./2004/9824-9904 dated 19.05.04 and in view of late
>declaration of NIOS, results, the competent authority is pleased to extend
>the date of admission for NIOS students only, as a special case upto
>31/08/2004. It is to be ensured that our own school students passing
>Compartmental Examination-2004 are given first preference and not denied
>admission. Grant of admission to NIOS students will be subject to the
>condition that they have studied relevant subjects in Class Xth and have
>acquired at least 55% in aggregate. The admission will be further subject
>to availability of seats. Class strength should not go beyond 40. It is
>also to be ensured that the age of the applicant is not more than 17 years
>as on 30th September 2004.
>
>
>
> Power of admission has already been delegated to concerned
>RDEs by the competent authority.
>
>
> Sd/-
>
>( Dr. M.C. MATHUR )
>
>ADDL. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (SCHOOL)
>
>All the Heads of Govt. Schools
>
>(Through DDEs), for strict compliance
>
>
>
>No.F.DE.23(28)/Sch.Br./2004/12757-13756 Dated 19-08-2004
>
>
>
>Copy for information to ;
>
>
>
>1. All RDEs/Addl Des of Dte. Of Education, Delhi.
>
>2. All Distt. DDE's to ensure compliance
>
>3. All E.O.s/D.E.O.s
>
>4. PS to Minister of Education/Secretary (Edn)/Director(Edn).
>
>5. Incharge, Computer Cell.
>
>Sd/-
>
>(O.P.NAUTIYAL)
>
>ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (SCHOOL)"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>12. The petitioner submits that the aforesaid impugned
>circular lays down as many as following 5 conditions for grant of admission
>for N.I.O.S. students in class XI in Govt. Schools in Delhi :-
>
>
>
>i). They have studied relevant subjects in class X.
>
>
>
>ii). They have acquired at least 55% marks in aggregate.
>
>
>
>iii). The admission will be further subject to availability of seats.
>
>
>
>iv). The class strength should not be beyond 40.
>
>
>
>v). The applicant is not more than 17 years as on 30th September
>2004.
>
>
>
>
>
>12-A. The petitioner submits that he is fulfilling the
>condition No. 1 as he has studied the relevant subjects in class X. He is
>not fulfilling the condition No. 2 as he has acquired 45% in aggregate in
>class X examination. He is not aware if he is fulfilling the conditions
>No. 3 & 4 because he does not have the details of the availability of seats
>and the number of the students in the class. He is not fulfilling the
>condition No. 5 as on 30.09.2004 he would be 28 days above 17 years in age.
>
>
>
>
>
>13. The petitioner submits that the conditions as laid
>down in the above impugned circular dated 19.08.2004 for admission of
>N.I.O.S. students in class XI in govt. schools in Delhi are arbitrary,
>discriminatory, unconstitutional, contrary to the provisions of Delhi
>School Education Act, 1973, violative of human and fundamental right to
>education of the petitioner and other like students as guaranteed to them
>under Article 14, 21 & 21A, 39 (f), 41 and 51A of the Constitution of India
>read with UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) and National
>Charter for Children, 2003 (adopted by the Parliament of India on 9th
>February 2004). It is also submitted that the respondents have no
>justification to deny admission to the petitioner in class XI in G.B.S.S.
>School No. 1 & 2, Sagarpur, Delhi or in any other govt. school nearby his
>residence.
>
>14. The petitioner submits that he belongs to a family a
>weaker section of the society. His father is working as a auto driver by
>hiring a autorikshaw and his average monthly income is not more than Rs.
>3000/-. There are 4 members in the family which included parents of the
>petitioner, petitioner and petitioner's sister. The petitioner's sister is
>studying in class IX in govt. school at Sagarpur. It is submitted that the
>parents of the petitioner are so economically poor that they can not
>afford the expenses for private coaching for education of the petitioner.
>Their only hope is the govt. school where the petitioner can get free
>education. In case the petitioner is denied admission in govt. school, he
>will not be able to pursue his studies further and his future would be
>ruined. It is submitted that masses cannot afford to send their children to
>fee charging private schools and their only hope is government school
>system.
>
>
>
>
>
>15. The petitioner submits that the class X pass
>certificate from N.I.O.S., Govt. of India is equivalent class X pass
>certificate from Central Board Secondary Examination. It is submitted that
>pass percentage in both C.B.S.E. certificate and N.I.O.S. certificate for
>class X examination is 33%. It is submitted that a student acquiring pass
>percentage in class X C.B.S.E. examination is considered eligible for
>admission in class XI in govt. schools. Therefore, laying down higher
>percentage of marks for the students holding class X pass certificate from
>N.I.O.S. is absolutely arbitrary, illegal, irrational, discriminatory,
>unconstitutional, opposed the public policy, against the public interest,
>defeats the human and fundamental right to education as guaranteed under
>Articles 14, 21, 21A, 39 (f) 41, 51A of the Constitution of India read
>with the National Policy on Education 1986 as modified in 1992.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>16. The petitioner submits that the conditions No. 3 & 4
>to the effect that the admission will be subject to availability of seats
>and class strength should not go beyond 40% are totally absurd, unjust,
>arbitrary, discriminatory, violative Articles 14, 21, 21A , 39 (f), 41, &
>51A of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that the concept of
>availability of seats in govt. schools for providing school education to
>the children is totally absurd, unfounded, illogical, arbitrary,
>discriminatory, violative of human and fundamental right of children as
>guaranteed to them under Articles 14, 21, 21A, 39(f), 41 & 51A of the
>Constitution of India. In case such conditions is enforced in the State
>run schools, the right to education (particularly, free and compulsory
>education) as envisage in the Articles 14, 21, 21A, 39 (f), 41 & 51A of the
>Constitution of India read with UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
>(1989) and National Charter for Children 2003, would became totally
>meaningless. The restricted concept to seats in the govt. schools is
>totally irrelevant and have no legal or rational basis. It is submitted
>that the admission to the children can not be denied merely on the ground
>so called non availability of seats and/or school and strength of children
>in class rooms is 40. Such conditions are unreasonable restrictions on the
>rights of the child to receive education in the State runs schools. It is
>submitted that it is duty of the State to provide schools education up to
>class XII to the children of this country and the same could not be denied
>whimsically or by adopting measurers which are anti national and anti
>human. It is submitted that the respondents have deliberately laid down
>the aforesaid arbitrary, discriminatory conditions in the impugned circular
>dated 19.08.2004 with definite intention to keep thousands of students out
>of govt. schools system and leave them to mercy of the God. It is
>submitted that the arbitrary, conditions have been laid down in the
>impugned circular without any authority in law.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>17. It is submitted that it is a well known fact that
>class rooms in the govt. schools in Delhi are over crowded and in some
>classes the number of students even goes up to 200. This is happened or is
>happening because of in action or failure on the part of the respondents to
>providing educational facilities to the children. It is submitted that it
>is the constitutional duty of the State to make necessary arrangements for
>providing school education to the children of this country. This is more
>so after the incorporation of Article 21A in the Constitution of India
>which makes a right to education of every child a fundamental right. It is
>submitted that to their own failures, the respondent No. 1& 2 can not deny
>admission to the children on totally irrelevant and illegal excuses. It is
>interesting to note that the respondents 1 & 2 in the said circular on one
>hand permitted students of NIOS to get admission in govt. schools and on
>the other hand have put so many absurd condition for admission which would
>virtually have the effect of denying admissions to students from NIOS.
>
>
>
>
>
>18. The petitioner submits that the condition No. 5
>that the applicant should not be more than 17 years as 31.09.2004 is also
>absurd, illogical and unconstitutional. Had the petitioner not resorted to
>X class examination from N.I.O.S., he would have continued in the G.B.S.S.
>School No. 2, Sagarpur, and he could not be thrown out of school on the
>ground that he has become over 17 years of age as on 30.09.2004. It is
>submitted that in the govt. school and particularly G.B.S.S. School No. 2,
>Sagarpur a large number of student who are presently studying in class XI
>are more then 17 years as on 30.09.2004. As a matter of illustration
>Mohinder of class Xi is more than 18 years and another Shakti Singh of
>class XI is more than 19 years. If other students of above 17 years of age
>are presently studying in the govt. schools, it would not be
>unconstitutional and arbitrary to deny admission to the children who are of
>similar age. In the present case, the petitioner would be 17 years 28 days
>as on 30.09.2004. It is submitted that such condition has no nexus with
>the object under lying therein.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>19. The petitioner submits that commercialization in
>education is unconstitutionally impermissible in our country. It is
>submitted that thousands of students have passed X from N.I.O.S. this year
>and are seeking admission in class XI in govt. schools in Delhi. It is
>submitted that by this impugned circular the govt. is denying admission of
>all these thousands of students on the one pretext or another by lying down
>arbitrary conditions in the impugned circular dated 19.08.2004 which have
>no nexus with the object underlying therein. It is submitted that almost
>all the students who have passed class X examination N.I.O.S. this year and
>seeking admission in class XI in the govt. schools are belonging to weaker
>sections of society. Their parents by virtually working as bounded
>labourers are hardly capable to sustain their family in meager incomes they
>earn. If their children are denied admission in govt. schools which are
>their only hope where their children can get education without spending on
>fee etc., they would be compelled to send their children to the fee
>charging private coaching centers or to send their children for work
>instead of school if they are totally unable to meet the education expenses
>of fee charging private coaching centers. It is submitted that the
>private coaching centers are known for exploiting hapless parents/students.
> The action of the respondents in denying admission to the children in the
>govt. schools and compelling them to go to the private teaching
>shops/centers would be nothing but encouraging commercialization of
>education. In other words by circular 19.08.2004 (Annexure-A), the
>respondents instead of curbing the evil the commercialization of education
>are themselves creating conditions to flourish commercialization of
>education. It is submitted that the respondents are totally insensitive to
>the educational needs of the children of masses of this country.
>
>
>
>
>
>20. The petitioner invites attention of this Hon'ble
>Court to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of J.P.
>Unnikrishanan vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 1993 (1) SCC 645 wherein their
>lordships declared that children of this country have a fundamental right
>to education which flows from Article 21 ( right to life) of the
>Constitution of India.
>
>
>
>
>
>21. The petitioner submits that respondent by lying down
> the aforementioned arbitrary conditions for admission are virtually
>closing the doors for education all such children. Such conditions are
>horrible as its only effect is absolute denial of admission to the students
>belonging to the weaker sections in the govt. schools. It is unfortunate
>that the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) the govt. in power in its common
>Minimum Programme (CMP) has given lot of emphasis on the education of the
>children but in reality all excuses are found to deny even basic education
>to the children. It is submitted that the respondents are hypocrites as
>they are making false promises to the masses of this country.
>
>
>
>
>
>22. The petitioner submits that the respondents by lying
>down the aforementioned arbitrary conditions have virtually deprived the
>petitioner and the other like students of their right to education as
>guaranteed to them under Article 14, 21 and 21A of the Constitution of
>India.
>
>
>
>
>
>23. The petitioner submits that the Government of India
>has rectified the UN Convention on the Rights of Child (1989) to which
>Government of India is also a signatory. It is also submitted that in
>February 2004 the Parliament of India has unanimously adopted National
>Charter for Children, 2003. It is submitted that the Government of India
>by rectifying the Convention on rights of the Child and by adopting the
>National Charter for Children, 2003 have promised to provide good quality
>education to every child of this country. It is submitted that the
>impugned circular dated 19.08.2004 goes against the letters and spirits of
>the aforementioned promises.
>
>
>
> A true copy of the National Charter for Children,
>2003 is enclosed hereto as ANNEXURE -F.
>
>24. The petitioner has not filed any similar petition
>either in Hon'ble Supreme court or in any Hon'ble High Court in India.
>
>
>
>
>
>25. The petitioner has no other efficacious alternative
>remedy except to approach this Hon'ble Court by way of present case.
>
>
>
>
>
>26. In the premises aforesaid, the petitioner most humbly
>prays that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to:-
>
>
>
>(a) declare that the conditions laid down in the impugned circular dated
>19.08.2004 (Annexure-A) are arbitrary, discriminatory, absurd, irrational,
>opposed to the public policy, against the public interest, violative of
>Article 14, 21, 21A, 39 (f), 41 & 51A of the Constitution of India contrary
>to the provisions of Delhi School Education Act, 1973 readwith UN
>Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) National Charter for children,
>2003 and National Policy on Education 1986 as modified in 1992;.
>
>
>
>(b) issue writ of certiorari or in nature of certiorari calling for the
>records of the respondents leading to the issuance of impugned circular
>dated 19.08.2004 (Annexure-A) and after examination thereof, strike down
>the conditions as laid down in the impugned circular dated 19.08.2004
>(Annexure-A);
>
>
>
>(c) issue writ of mandamus or in nature of mandamus directing the
>respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and other like
>students for admission in class XI in G.B.S.S. School No. 1, Sagarpur or
>G.B.S.S. School, No. 2, Sagarpur or in any other govt. school nearby the
>residence of the petitioner in the current academic session 2004-2005;
>
>
>
> (d) pass any such further order or direction as this Hon'ble
>Court may in the facts and circumstances of the present case deem fit and
>proper in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents; and
>
>
>
>
>
>DELHI: (ASHOK AGARWAL &
>CO.)
>
>DATED: 28.08.2004 ADVOCATES FOR THE PETITIONER
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Millions of eligible singles.
http://www.bharatmatrimony.com/cgi-bin/bmclicks1.cgi?74 Find the perfect
match on BharatMatrimony.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Vikas Kumar1-Admission.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 52736 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.architexturez.net/pipermail/eebill/attachments/20040912/d1848cc7/VikasKumar1-Admission.doc
More information about the eebill
mailing list