ORDER : 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, most respectfully and humbly prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction: (I) the present writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed; (II) the impugned order dated 28.02.2025 (Annex.13) may kindly be quashed and set-aside. (III) the list dated 27.07.2023 (Annex.7) may kindly be quashed and set-aside qua the petitioner; (IV) the Gross Family income of the petitioner be considered between 0-8 lacs; (V) the respondents may be directed to grant the benefit of the Scholarship to the petitioner while treating her to be in the E-1 Category. (VI) Any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be passed in favour of the humble petitioner.” 2. The facts, in nutshell, as narrated in the present writ petition, are that the petitioner applied for the purpose of grant of Scholarship in pursuance of the Rajiv Gandhi Scholarship for Academic Excellence Scheme , 2021. The petitioner, along with her application, submitted Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of her father. The application submitted by the petitioner was required to be considered in the category E-1, which has been classified as the group, wherein the student and the family of the student is having the gross income below Rs.8 lacs. The ITR of the relevant year of the petitioner’s father indicated an additional income from capital gain and therefore, the candidature of the petitioner was not found to be falling in category E-1. The petitioner on knowing the said fact submitted a representation on 24.07.2023, however, the grievance of the petitioner was not redressed. In these circumstances, a writ petition bearing SBCWP No.11526/2023 came to be filed, which was decided by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.08.2023, directing the respondents to consider the grant of benefit of Scholarship to the petitioner in the category E-1 after passing a speaking order while taking into consideration the ITR of the assessment year 2023-24/financial year 2022-23 so also keeping into consideration Condition No.8(v) of Guidelines of Scholarship Scheme dated 08.06.2023 (Annex.2). It was further directed that in case, after considering such representation, the petitioner’s father is found to be having income less than Rs.8 lacs as an annual income, then while treating her under E-1 category, the benefit of scholarship should be granted. 2.1 The case of petitioner was considered in light of the order dated 29.08.2023, however, the same came to be rejected by the impugned order dated 28.02.2025. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Condition No.8(v), if in a particular year, the income through capital gain is shown on account of retiral benefits/gift/sale receipt of immovable assets, then the said capital gain is to be ignored for the purpose of assessing the annual income in order to decide eligibility for availing the scholarship. 3.1 As per learned counsel for the petitioner, case of the petitioner is required to be considered in the category E-1 as the regular income of her father is below Rs.8 lacs. It is argued that the ITR is indicating the income above Rs.8 lacs and the reason behind it, is the capital gain. While referring to the ITR so also the revenue record, it is submitted that as a matter of fact, the petitioner’s father received some ancestral property and the ancestral property was sold in part. On account of this, income through capital gain is reflected in the three ITRs, which are available on record. It is argued that the income through capital gain is required to be ignored irrespective of the fact that such gain is reflected in the three ITRs of assessment years 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24. It is further argued that the respondents have given incorrect interpretation to Condition 8(v) of the Guidelines of Scholarship Scheme and have not ensured the compliance of the direction given by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while deciding SBCWP No.11526/2023. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that Condition No.8(v) of the Guidelines of Scholarship Scheme (Annex.2) is very clear and specific. As per learned counsel for the respondents, a candidate for the purpose of grant of scholarship under category E-1 would be eligible if the income of the parents is less than Rs.8 lacs in a financial year. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that Condition No.8(v) of the Guidelines of Scholarship Scheme (Annex.2) is very clear and specific. As per learned counsel for the respondents, a candidate for the purpose of grant of scholarship under category E-1 would be eligible if the income of the parents is less than Rs.8 lacs in a financial year. It is stated that there is no doubt about the fact that the capital gain as reflected in the ITRs is required to be excluded in terms of Condition No.8(v). However, in the present case, petitioner’s father has received capital gain in not a particular financial year but in all three financial years and this shows that petitioner’s father is well-off and the capital gain is not only in a particular year, but in all the three years and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for exemption as provided in Condition No.8(v) of the Guidelines of Scholarship Scheme. 4.1 While elaborating the submissions, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the purpose of introducing the Scholarship Scheme is to provide financial help to needy and deserving students and this benefit is not to be extended to those candidates, who have strong financial background. It is further submitted that the interpretation of the provision is required to be made in a manner in which it serve the object and the purpose for which the scheme was introduced. 4.2 As per the Scheme, the scholarship was to be given to 500 students, who are meritorious, however, on account of financial constraint, they are not able to seek education from the universities, which are outside the country and that being so, the petitioner is not eligible to be considered under E-1 category. Moreover, the continuous reference of income may be on account of sale of ancestral property would be treated to be regular income. Condition 8(v) specifically refers to words ‘usually not annual’ clearly indicate that purpose was to extend benefit of scholarship to financially needy students. Just to overcome exceptional eventuality, an exception was provided for those students who though have poor family background, but may not loose an opportunity to seek scholarship on account of capital gain in a preceding year. Condition 8(v) specifically refers to words ‘usually not annual’ clearly indicate that purpose was to extend benefit of scholarship to financially needy students. Just to overcome exceptional eventuality, an exception was provided for those students who though have poor family background, but may not loose an opportunity to seek scholarship on account of capital gain in a preceding year. 4.3 While referring to the impugned order, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the case of the petitioner was considered and considering the ITRs of assessment year 2021-22 so also the assessment year 2022-23 indicate that the petitioner’s father is having regular income through sale/purchase of immovable property and the annual income in the relevant financial year was found to be Rs.38,58,103/- and therefore, the case of the petitioner was shifted from E-1 category to E-3 category. The case of the petitioner once shifted to E-3 category could have been considered only if seats remained unfilled after exhausting E-1 & E-2 category candidates. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The controversy involved in the present writ petition hinges around the interpretation of Condition No.8(v) of the Guidelines of Scholarship Scheme (Annex.2). For ready reference, the ‘Hindi version’ so also ‘English version’ of the Scheme is reproduced as under :- 8. Definition of family and determination of income: (v) ITRs of parents of some candidates include income of certain specific nature, which is usually not annual, such as retirement benefits/gifts/ endorsements of assets etc. This type of income will not be included in the gross family income assessment for determining the income category of the candidate.” 7. A bare perusal of Condition No.8(v) indicates that the benefit of the Scholarship Scheme is to be extended to the students based on the income of their parents and for the purpose of determining annual income, an exceptional receipt of income through retiral benefits/gift/capital gain on account of sale of property is required to be excluded for the purpose of considering annual income of the student. In the present case, the contention of the petitioner is that the annual income of the parents of the petitioner is less than Rs.8 lacs and therefore, her case is required to be considered under Category E-1. In the present case, the contention of the petitioner is that the annual income of the parents of the petitioner is less than Rs.8 lacs and therefore, her case is required to be considered under Category E-1. The capital gain, which is reflected from the ITRs, may be in two consecutive years, but same cannot be concluded to be an annual income as the same is on account of sale of ancestral property and therefore, true interpretation of Condition 8(v) makes petitioner eligible under Category E-1. Such consistent capital gain, may be in two or three consecutive years, would not make petitioner ineligible and the reason assigned in the impugned order that the petitioner’s parents are involved in sale & purchase of immovable property, is factually incorrect. 8. Before considering the contentions as raised by learned counsel for the petitioner so also learned counsel for the respondents, it would be appropriate to revisit the Scheme for the purpose of granting scholarship. 9. The ‘Preface’ so also the ‘Object’ of the Scheme are reproduced as under :- “ Preface : The former Prime Minister of India Late Shri Rajiv Gandhi had a modern vision for the students, youth and education of the country and his contribution in this context was notable not only at the national but also at the international level. In the year 1986, he announced a National Policy for Education to modernize and expand higher education programs across India. In the same year, he established the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya system. In other words, former Prime Minister Late Shri Rajiv Gandhi was committed to academic excellence. Paying tribute to his unforgettable modern and inclusive vision in the field of education. Honorable Chief Minister of Rajasthan, Shri Ashok Gehlot, on 20.08.2021, on the occasion of birth anniversary of former Prime Minister late Shri Rajiv Gandhi announced that 200 meritorious students of Rajasthan will be provided financial assistance to study in the top universities/institutes of the world. In compliance with the above announcement, the Rajiv Gandhi Scholarship for Academic Excellence (RGS) scheme, 2021 was implemented in the year 2021-22. This scheme is effective from 2021-22. Under the scheme, 249 students have been selected for scholarships until the year 2022-23. In compliance with the above announcement, the Rajiv Gandhi Scholarship for Academic Excellence (RGS) scheme, 2021 was implemented in the year 2021-22. This scheme is effective from 2021-22. Under the scheme, 249 students have been selected for scholarships until the year 2022-23. As per the budget announcement of the year 2023-24 (25.00.0 dated 10.02.2023) by the Honorable Chief Minister, the number of new scholarship awards in the scheme has been increased from 200 to 500.” “ 2. Objective of the scheme: The objective of this scheme is to provide financial assistance to the students selected for higher education in the approved, latest 150 QS world ranked universities/institutes for UG/PG/Ph.D. and Post-Doctoral programs in all subjects/courses. The scheme further aims to motivate the bonafide students of Rajasthan State to study abroad and to help them in making a career, and to encourage such students to participate in the development of the state. Preference for scholarship will be given to students belonging to the lower income group.” 10. The basis of grant of Scholarship is based on the gross income of the parents of the students. Condition No.3 of the Scholarship Scheme is also reproduced as under :- “3. Categories of income, subject/course and number of scholarships under the scheme : (i) Categories of income : Three categories have been determined in the scheme according to the gross family income of the student and his family - The gross income of the student and his family from all sources is below 8 lakh per annum. The gross income of the student and his family from all sources is between 8 to 25 lakh per annum. The gross income of the student and his family from all sources is above 25 lakh per annum. Category E1 Category E2 Category E3 (ii) Subjects/courses: All subjects/courses taught in listed 150 universities/institutions (Annexure-1) as per latest QS world ranking at all levels such as undergraduate, postgraduate, Ph.D. and Post-Doctoral programs will be considered under the scheme. (iii) Number of Scholarships: The 200 number of scholarships which was allowed in the earlier guidelines has been increased to 500 new students per year. (iv) The scholarship shall be distributed as follows: A. The applications of the E1 category will be considered in the first phase of evaluation as specified in the guidelines of the scheme. (iii) Number of Scholarships: The 200 number of scholarships which was allowed in the earlier guidelines has been increased to 500 new students per year. (iv) The scholarship shall be distributed as follows: A. The applications of the E1 category will be considered in the first phase of evaluation as specified in the guidelines of the scheme. In the second and third phase, eligible student of E1 and E2 category shall be selected and in the last phase, E1, E2 as well as E3 category applications will be considered. For the selections, first of all E1 category will be considered. Thereafter E2 category and if the eligible E1, E2 category applicants are not available till last phase, then only applications of E3 category will be assessed. B. 30% awards/seats are earmarked for E1 and E2 category girl students only. E1 category girl students will be selected first for 30 percent vacancies, if E1 category girl students are not available and seats remain vacant, then in that case, girl candidates of E2 category will be selected. If the earmarked vacancies for girl candidates are exhausted, then their selection will also be done on the basis of general merit. C. Girls of E3 category will be selected only on the basis of general merit. In case of 30 percent awards for E1 and E2 category girl students remain vacant in the initial phases of evaluation; these seats will be kept vacant till the last phase. Candidates of other income category will be allowed for these vacancies only in the last phase, and these awards shall be allotted only on the basis of general merit. D. The scholarship for B.E., B.Tech, B.Arch, MBBS, BDS (Engineering, Architecture, Medical, Dentistry) courses at undergraduate level will be given to maximum 7.5% (rounded off to 37 seats only) students as follows : (i) 1-150 QS world ranked Universities/institutions will only be allowed. In addition, these universities/institutions should be ranked among the top 25 QS World ranking subject wise. The selection of these students will be based on the QS world ranking of the university/institution. There is no reservation of seats for these courses. (ii) In case of hybrid course of Engineering and Science at the under graduate level, it shall be considered in the category of other subjects.” 11. The selection of these students will be based on the QS world ranking of the university/institution. There is no reservation of seats for these courses. (ii) In case of hybrid course of Engineering and Science at the under graduate level, it shall be considered in the category of other subjects.” 11. A perusal of the preface and object of the Scheme indicates that the purpose of introducing the Scheme was to provide financial help to needy and deserving students, who are though academically sound but on account of financial constraint, could not take admission in the Universities abroad. Such meritorious students after obtaining such degrees would serve the State and prove to be asset for the economic growth of the State. 12. Considering such preface and the object, this Court is of the opinion that benefit is to be extended to meritorious and the needy students whose family income is not sufficient to support their studies in the foreign countries. This object is further reflected from the Scheme itself where the income has been categorized in three components. The benefit is of the Scheme is to be first given to the most needy students, whose family income is from 0-8 lacs (E-1 category). The E-2 category is from 8-25 lacs and E-3 category is above 25 lacs. The Scheme further indicates that first preference would be given to E-1 category candidates and followed by E-2 category & E-3 category. If E-1 & E-2 categories are not available for availing the benefit of Scholarship Scheme, the benefit would be extended to E-3 category candidates. Such being the preference criteria, there is no doubt that the object of the scheme is to extend financial help to needy students. 13. Considering the Scheme and the Object, the case of the petitioner is required to be examined. 14. The contention of the petitioner is that the income reflected through capital gain in consecutive years should not be considered to be a regular income as the capital gain is on account of sale of ancestral property. Even if such contention is accepted, then too, considering the object and considering the fact that it is not only in one financial year but in different financial years and average income is about 38 lacs. That being so, it does not make the petitioner eligible to be an E-1 category candidate. Even if such contention is accepted, then too, considering the object and considering the fact that it is not only in one financial year but in different financial years and average income is about 38 lacs. That being so, it does not make the petitioner eligible to be an E-1 category candidate. The income as reflected in the ITRs rather reflects strong financial background and therefore, the interpretation of Condition No.8(v) cannot be given to result in frustrating the object of the guidelines. 15. This matter can be viewed from another angle. The petitioner is claiming under a policy of the respondent department to help needy and deserving students. That being so, denial of such benefit is neither violating statutory right nor any fundamental right. The interpretation given by the respondent is justified and in furtherance to the object for which the scheme was introduced. 16. As an upshot of the above discussion, the writ petition is dismissed. 17. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.