Judgment Ravi S.Dhavan, J. 1. Frida Minj applied to sit and take the Bihar Combined Entrance Competitive Examination, 2001 for Grade-A nursing course to any Medical College or hospital in the State of Bihar. She succeeded at the examination and, thus, could receive an assignment for training at a medical college or a hospital in accordance with the merit-cum-choice criteria on the gradation which she had received at the examination. 2. Though successful yet she was denied an admission on the ground that she does not fulfil the requisite conditions contained in the prospectus for 2001, particularly clauses 4.2 and 6.2. 3. Virtually issues have been created out of non-issues and the entire controversy which has been created requires an interpretation on expressions like "native" and "domicile". The prospectus, a public publication refers to these terms: These terms in a socialist, democratic republic are, at least one of them, archaic and out of date. To use expressions like native is an insult. In so far as it may mean local inhabitant so far as so good. But it is intended to interpret the expression with any other meaning as the dictionary mentions it then it is bad. In the dictionary, unfortunately, the word "native" may mean "a member of a non-white indigenous people as regarded by the colonial settler". An outmoded interpretation is also being given to the word domicile but this Court deals with the first aspect first. 4. Under clause 4.2 the appellants parents should be native of Bihar. Her parents are dead. Now she is being confronted with a situation that she is perhaps a native of Jharkhand State which was created after the bifurcation of Bihar in November, 2000. May be her parents had originally resided in that part of the State which today is Jharkhand but what exactly is the sin of the appellant, Frida Minj, that with her parents dead someone will tell her where her residence may be. She took her examinations at Gaya from High School Muradpur in 1999. She was examined by the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. This is on record of both the writ petition and the Letters Patent Appeal. She took her Intermediate examination from M.S.Y. College, Gaya. The examination was held in February, 2001. The examination was conducted by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council, Patna. Frida Minj cannot be attributed to any other residence except in Bihar. This is on record of both the writ petition and the Letters Patent Appeal. She took her Intermediate examination from M.S.Y. College, Gaya. The examination was held in February, 2001. The examination was conducted by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council, Patna. Frida Minj cannot be attributed to any other residence except in Bihar. In the circumstances, the aspect of her parents being native of another area is irrelevant. There is no citizenship of States under the Constitution of India. 5. The enquiry as to where her parents may have had domicile is also out of context. Her parents domicile was in Bihar and they are dead. A subsequent creation of the State of Jharkhand cannot change their domicile. If they were alive they could claim benefit of both. Frida Minj has studied in Bihar, the fact that her parents may be domiciled in another area would not be a factor which would go against her. 6. Not relevant to this aspect is again an expression contained in clause 4.2 that should a candidates parents be refugee then they may be entitled to some benefits. Unless this expression means a classified category of a different kind like a refugee of 1947, such a category may not be available today. The term refugee will need to be clarified. The prospectus contains clauses which have dated and rusted. The prospectus has not been updated. In todays context and in modern times the fact that the nation is a republic, expressions like native has a stink of colonial rule and ought to be removed from the prospectus. These clauses create misunderstanding the like which have happened in the present case. 7. Now clause 6.2. This requires the appellant to obtain the residency of her parents and a death certificate that her parents have died. The appellant is a resident of Bihar and has taken her examinations in Bihar. The residency of her parents is of no relevance notwithstanding they are dead. She studied in Bihar, she applied from Bihar and she has to be considered as resident in Bihar. The fact that she may receive a reservation in the category "Scheduled Tribe" is an entirely another matter. 8. The Court is told that training courses have started. The residency of her parents is of no relevance notwithstanding they are dead. She studied in Bihar, she applied from Bihar and she has to be considered as resident in Bihar. The fact that she may receive a reservation in the category "Scheduled Tribe" is an entirely another matter. 8. The Court is told that training courses have started. The Court fails to understand the purpose of telling the Court about this unless it is with the intention to say that she cannot join during the current course. Issues cannot be raised to defeat legitimate candidates and their legitimate expectations. Permitting delay in the process of admission and then place a hurdle that a candidate may not be entitled to admission on a technicality is arbitrary and inequitable. The situation is not of the making of the appellant. 9. Whoever may be incharge of the Board must change their psyche and not look at the citizens in the eyes of a native and to create issues out of non-issues, Every citizen of the nation is resident of the country. There are even Non Resident Indians who claim privileges of residency. The appellant had crossed that hurdle. She was unnecessarily denied an admission to an institution by creating an issue with a narrow minded approach. The Court has expressed itself that the disease arises from an out of date prospectus. The quarrel is with the way and the manner in which the prospectus expresses itself. The appellant is not at fault. 10. The order of learned Judge on the petition in the facts and circumstances of the case, which has the effect of denying the appellant admission to the training of nurses grade-A course is set aside. The appellant is entitled to present herself to the Board and the Board will be obliged to assign her to an institution where she will take her training. This is a very small issue and it should not play to the detriment of the candidates particularly from reserved classes. 11. The appeal is allowed with cost.