ORDER : 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to declare the action of respondents in denying admission for 1st Class in P.M. Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.2, Vijayawada, Region Hyderabad (RTE Lottery No.18) as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to provide admission to petitioner's son in the aforementioned School. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he belongs to Scheduled Caste community. He is a daily wage employee working in and around Vijayawada as painter. In response to Online Notification dated 07.03.2025, he applied for admission of his son Nishanth Jaladi in 1st Class in Kendriya Vidyalaya schools of viz. P.M. Shri K.V. Nos.1 and 2 in Vijayawada region. As per the Notification/instructions, up to three choices of KendriyaVidyalayas without any preference between them, can be given i.e. one can apply up to three KendriyaVidyalayas using the same online application form. Distance between residence of the petitioner and P.M.ShriKendriya Vidyalaya No.1 is less than 5 KMs, and the other P.M. Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya is more than 5 KMs from the residence of petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that his son is eligible for admission under RTE norms, and in pursuance of application No.252540109382813365, through lottery, his son was allotted P.M. Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.2, Vijayawada with lottery No.18 in RTE Lottery result. Accordingly, he approached the School on 29.3.2025 and 01.04.2025 for admission, but the Principal of 4th respondent school informed him that admission cannot be given as distance of his residence which is disclosed in the application form, to the School is more than 5 KMs. It is the grievance of petitioner that admission cannot be denied only on the ground of distance of his house is more than 5 KMs away from School, and that he does not have any permanent residence and he is staying in a rented house and he is ready to shift his residence to the nearest location to school immediately for better education of his son and will give undertaking to that effect. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Counter affidavit, deposed by 3rd respondent, is filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4, inter alia, stating as follows: Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) issued Admission schedule for the session 2025-26. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Counter affidavit, deposed by 3rd respondent, is filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4, inter alia, stating as follows: Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) issued Admission schedule for the session 2025-26. Certain seats are reserved for fresh admissions as per the Admission Guidelines for KVS within the approved class strength of 40 students per Section i.e. 25% (10 seats) under the Right to Education Act, 2009; 15% (06 seats) for Scheduled Caste; 7.5% (03 seats) for Scheduled Tribe; 27% (11 seats) for OBC and 3% for differently abled applicants, horizontally. As per Sl.No.4 (1) (I) of the Admission Guidelines, out of 40 seats per Section in Class-I, 10 seats are to be filled as per Right to Education provisions and the same will be filled by draw of lots from all applications of SC/ST/ EWS/BPL/OBC/differently abled, taken together who are the resident of "neighbourhood." For determining the limits of "neighbourhood", KendriyaVidyalayas categorized the distance from the Vidyalayala to the residence, as per the KVS Admission Guidelines, which is 5 KMs radius, in case of major cities and urban area (all district headquarters and metros) and 8 KMs radius, in case of other places and areas. A child applying in one of the above categories will be automatically considered for admission in RTE category in Vijayawada, to which he applied, as per the KVS Admission Guidelines. Petitioner submitted online application on 19.03.2025 for admission to Class-I to his son during 2025-26 under RTE at PM Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.1, Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada, as 1st choice, and PM Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.2, Wagon Workshop, Guntupalli, Vijayawada, as 2nd choice, by providing residential address as "H.No.53-4-68, Ground Floor, Opposite Simhachalam Enclave, Christurajupuram, Vijayawada" by declaring the distance from both the Schools to his residence as less than or equal to 5 KMs. Name of the ward of the petitioner did not appear in 1st list in respect of admission to P.M. Shri K.V. No.1, Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada, but it was in wait list at sl.No.84. Name of the ward of the petitioner did not appear in 1st list in respect of admission to P.M. Shri K.V. No.1, Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada, but it was in wait list at sl.No.84. For admission in P.M.K.V.No.1, Wagon Workship, Vijayawada, name of the ward of the petitioner appeared at sl.No.18 in 1st select list of 20 candidates under RTE quota, for which the prescribed distance from the Vidyalaya to residence should be less than or equal to 5 KMs, and his name was at wait list at Sl.No.92 in Scheduled Caste reservation category, for which distance is not a criteria, and in other service category, he stood in wait list at sl.No.152, for which also distance is not a criteria. On verification of documents, it was found that the distance from P.M.Shri K.V. No.2, Wagon Workshop, Vijayawada to residence of petitioner is about 17 KMs. Therefore, the petitioner submitted misleading information in his online application that the distance is less than or equal to 5 KMs. The petitioner's ward does not fulfil the required and prescribed norms of "neighbourhood" in terms of Admission Guidelines for KVS. In view of the same, admission is not provided to the ward of the petitioner. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits, and it is prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.U.M.V. Prasad, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri T.D. Phani Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5. Perused the record. 5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent-authorities cannot deny admission to a student on the ground of distance of his residence to School, under the guise of Admission Guidelines, if he is otherwise eligible, and the same violates the constitutional rights of the petitioner's ward to education. He submits that the petitioner is a daily wage worker, working as painter, and has no permanent residence and is staying in a rented house, and he is ready to shift his residence to nearest location to the school immediately, and hence, he prays to direct the respondents to provide admission to petitioner's son. 6. He submits that the petitioner is a daily wage worker, working as painter, and has no permanent residence and is staying in a rented house, and he is ready to shift his residence to nearest location to the school immediately, and hence, he prays to direct the respondents to provide admission to petitioner's son. 6. On the other hand, it is the submission of the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 that it is clearly prescribed in the Admission Guidelines that the distance between the residence of student and the school shall be within 5 KMs radius from the School in major cities and urban areas, in order to consider a candidate for admission in "neighbourhood" category, and having agreed for the same, online application was submitted by the petitioner, and now, he cannot turn around and contend that distance cannot be the basis to provide an admission. He submits that if the petitioner's ward is provided admission, the other eligible candidate, who is residing in the prescribed distance, would suffer, and that the Admission Guidelines are not challenged by the petitioner, and hence, he prays to dismiss the Writ Petition. He relied on a decision of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Poorvi Gawhade v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangthan (KVS) & others in W.P. No. 12712 of 2020 dated 22.02.2021 in support of his contention. 7. The factual matrix is not in dispute. Petitioner made an online application on 19.03.2025 for admission of his son Nishanth Jaladi into Class-I in under RTE quota in PM Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.1, Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada, as 1st choice, and PM Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.2, Wagon Workshop, Guntupalli, Vijayawada, as 2nd choice. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner provided his residential address as "H.No.53-4-68, Ground Floor, Opposite Simhachalam Enclave, Christurajupuram, Vijayawada" by declaring the distance from both the Schools to his residence as less than or equal to 5 KMs. From a perusal of the Admission Guidelines in KendriyaVidyalayas, it is clear that out of 40 seats per Section in Class-I, 10 seats are to be filled as per Right to Education provisions and the same will be filled by draw of lots from all applications of SC/ST/EWS/BPL/OBC/differently abled, taken together who are the resident of "neighbourhood". From a perusal of the Admission Guidelines in KendriyaVidyalayas, it is clear that out of 40 seats per Section in Class-I, 10 seats are to be filled as per Right to Education provisions and the same will be filled by draw of lots from all applications of SC/ST/EWS/BPL/OBC/differently abled, taken together who are the resident of "neighbourhood". It is also not in dispute that in order to determine the limits of "neighbourhood" or "distance" from the Vidyalaya to the residence of the student is categorized by the Kendriya Vidyalayas, as per the KVS Admission Guidelines i.e. 5 KMs radius, in case of major cities and urban area (all district headquarters and metros) and 8 KMs radius, in case of other places and areas. It is also not in dispute that a child applying in one of the above categories will be automatically considered for admission in RTE category in Vijayawada, to which he applied, as per the KVS Admission Guidelines. 8. It is also clear from the record that petitioner's ward could not come up for admission in 1st list in respect of admission into 3 sections in Class-I to P.M. Shri K.V. No.1, Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada and he was in wait list at sl.No.84. In respect of admission into 2 sections of Class-I to P.M.K.V.No.2, Wagon Workship, Vijayawada, name of the ward of the petitioner appeared at sl.No.18 in 1st select list of 20 candidates under RTE quota, for which the prescribed distance from the Vidyalaya to residence should be less than or equal to 5 KMs. It is also evident from the record that name of the ward of the petitioner was at wait list at Sl.No.92 in Scheduled Caste reservation category, for which distance is not a criteria, and in other service category, he stood in wait list at sl.No.152, for which also distance is not a criteria. On the ground that the distance between the residence of the petitioner and the P.M. Shri K.V.No.2, Wagon Workshop, Guntupalli, Vijayawada, is more than 5 KMs, candidature of ward of the petitioner was not considered for admission in "neighbourhood" category. Admittedly, distance of the residence of the petitioner to P.M. Shri K.V.No.2, Wagon Workshop, Guntupalli, Vijayawada is about 17 KMs, which does not fit into the Admission Guidelines for KVS for consideration of his ward's admission in "neighbourhood" category. Admittedly, distance of the residence of the petitioner to P.M. Shri K.V.No.2, Wagon Workshop, Guntupalli, Vijayawada is about 17 KMs, which does not fit into the Admission Guidelines for KVS for consideration of his ward's admission in "neighbourhood" category. The petitioner's ward could not come up for admission in other categories viz. Scheduled Caste reservation or Other Service Category. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a student cannot be denied on the ground of distance of his residence to School, and that the petitioner has no permanent residence and residing in a rented house, and he is a daily wage worker working as painter, and that the petitioner undertakes to shift his residence immediately to a nearest place to School, and hence, a direction may be issued to consider candidature of son of the petitioner for admission. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following decisions, in support of his contention: (a) Judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in C. Balasubramanian v. The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, IIT Campus, Chennai in W.P. No. 14189 of 2025 dated 30.04.2025 wherein it is held in paragraph No.7, as under: “7. In so far as the last objection regarding non-compliance with the neighbourhood criteria is concerned, the same cannot be permitted for denying admission under the RTE quota. The object and intent of the RTE quota is to encourage persons who belong to lower strata of the society, to educate their children and also to ensure that children belonging to the lower strata of society are not deprived of best education. The present case is very peculiar in the sense that, though the wards parents belong to a remote village in Thenkasi District, where there are no KV Schools within 5 Kilometers from the village of Kothainachiyapuram, Sankarankoil, Tenkasi District, they desire to educate their child in Kendriya Vidyalaya, Chennai with the support of their brother who is residing in Chennai. In my view, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the denial of admission to Master C.N. Varun Sethupathy, on the ground of neighbourhood criteria, would defeat the object of the beneficial legislation. It is only to encourage parents to send their wards to schools with best infrastructure and training that the RTE Act has been enacted allocating 25% seats to children belonging to lower strata of the society. It is only to encourage parents to send their wards to schools with best infrastructure and training that the RTE Act has been enacted allocating 25% seats to children belonging to lower strata of the society. When there is no private school within 16 KMs of the wards parents residence, the ward cannot be deprived of education, more so, when the parents are willing to send the child to Chennai, to his parental uncle's house, for the purpose of his education.” (b) Judgment of the High Court of Orissa in Rakesh Mahallick v. Deputy Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Bhubaneshwar & another, 2019 SCC OnLine Ori 517 : AIR 2020 Ori 14 wherein it is held in paragraph No.35, as under: “In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as well as law discussed above, the reason as endorsed in Annexure-5 dated 01.05.2019 rejecting the candidature of the petitioner on the ground of distance found more than 5 KMs (Google search), cannot sustain in the eyes of law, and further reason assigned that more than 5 KMs is one of the reasons for denying admission under RTE category also cannot sustain, and the same are hereby quashed. The opposite parties are directed to give admission to the petitioner in KV Bhubaneswar No.2 in Standard-I for the academic sessions 2019-20 within a period of 10 days from the date of passing of this judgment. It is made clear that if the seats are filled up, necessary steps shall be taken for creation of one seat for the petitioner and he shall be allowed to continue in KC Bhubaneswar No.2 in Standard-I for the academic sessions 2019-20 by providing all assistance to him in comliance of Rule 14 of the Right to Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010.” 11. Mercy is reasonable at times of affliction as clouds of rain is reasonable at times of drought. Mercy and rain are timely blessings that alieviate suffering and provide relief when most needed. In the case on hand, petitioner is an illiterate and has no permanent residence. Petitioner is daily wage worker i.e. a painter, who works in various places in and around Vijayawada, without having a permanent residence. He is struggling for admission of his son for providing better education to his son. In the case on hand, petitioner is an illiterate and has no permanent residence. Petitioner is daily wage worker i.e. a painter, who works in various places in and around Vijayawada, without having a permanent residence. He is struggling for admission of his son for providing better education to his son. Being illiterate, he might not have understood the Admission Guidelines in proper perspective at the time of making the online application. Admittedly, pursuant to the interim direction of this Court, a seat is kept vacant in first standard in P.M. Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.2, Vijayawada. The object and intent of the RTE quota is to encourage persons who belong to lower strata of the society, to educate their children and also to ensure that children belonging to the lower strata of society are not deprived of best education. The petitioner undertook to shift his residence immediately to a nearest place to the School. If an opportunity is given to the petitioner's ward by providing a seat in P.M. Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.2, Vijayawada, there is chance of the boy getting good education and it would create a cause for upliftment of the entire family. It is only to encourage parents to send their wards to schools with best infrastructure and training that the RTE Act has been enacted, allocating 25% seats to children belonging to lower strata of the society. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, when a seat is kept vacant, this Court directs respondents 1 to 4 to consider feasibility of providing admission to son of the petitioner in P.M.Shri Kendriya Vidyalaya No.2, Vijayawada, subject to petitioner shifting his residence immediately to a place within 5 KMs from the school and furnishing the said address to the authorities. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Writ Petition, shall stand closed.