Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1994 DIGILAW 118 (ALL)

Rajul Jain v. Banaras Hindu University

1994-02-02

M.P.SINGH

body1994
JUDGMENT M.P. Singh, J. 1. The human nature is really very mischievous. It always tries to unsettle a settled thing. Nothing surprising. The domain of law is no exception. Even the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case Chairman/ Director, Combined Entrance Examination v. Osiris Das, (1992) 3 SCC 348, is sot acceptable to the petitioners. The Apex Court has held that in the matter relating to admission in educational institutions, reservation of seats for the sons and daughters of the employees of the institution is violative, of Article 14 of the Constitution. The dependants of the employees cannot claim any legal right of such reservation. They do not constitute a separate class. Are they justified In canvassing before this Court to take a contrary view ? No. This court is bound to follow the said pronouncement which Is absolutely clear and reasonable. 2. Petitioners are sons and daughters of teachers of Banaras Hindu University. It it a body corporate and is governed by the provisions of Banaras Hindu University Act, 1915, Statutes and Ordinances framed thereunder. They are claiming a separate quota for the admission in the Institute of Medical Sciences of the University. There are 50 seats for M.BB.S. course. Over 27000 students appeared In the Entrance test. Apart from these 50 seats there are 5 seats under supernumerary quota for bonafide students of Banaras Hindu University and 4 seats for Foreign National to be filled up on the nomination of the Government of India. This case is not concerned with these reservations. 3. The University had issued Information Booklet for Pre-Medical Test (PMT)/Pharmacy admission Test (PAT)-1993 Clause 6.1. of the same runs as follows : "6.1 For Admission to Ist Year M.B.B.S. Course : Fifty (50) seats are available for admission to the M.B.B.S. Course of the Institute. Out of above seats 15% shall be reserved for Scheduled Castes and 7 1/2% for Scheduled Tribes candidates who fulfil the minimum requirement and qualify in the Pre-Medical Test. 6.1.1 Out of the above, a minimum of five girl candidates shall be admitted in order of merit. Provided that nothing in this clause shall bar the admission of more than five girl candidates in case more than five are selected on merit in the open competition. 6.1.1 Out of the above, a minimum of five girl candidates shall be admitted in order of merit. Provided that nothing in this clause shall bar the admission of more than five girl candidates in case more than five are selected on merit in the open competition. 6.1.2 A quota of 5 supernumerary seats Is reserved for the bonafide students of Degree Course of the Banaras Hindu University (as per Appendix-1 page no. 16) who qualify in the P.M.T. 6.1.3. An additional quota of four supernumerary seats is also available for foreign nationals." 4. The selection procedure prescribed therein provide that the candidates will be selected in order of merit on the basis of the aggregate marks secured at the test. The minimum qualifying marks will be 50% for the general category (including B.H.U. supernumerary quota) and 40% for Schedule caste/Scheduled Tribes candidates. The result of the competitive test, held on 4-6-1993. on All India basis, was declared on 16-7-1993. The meeting of the Admission Committee was held and the process of admission was closed on 6th September, 1993. In the Institute of Medical Sciences, the teaching facility is only for 60 students, of course the number can be increased under the directions of Medical Council of India. 5. Part I Volume II of Banaras Hindu University Clendar Is a compilation of the Academic Ordinances and Regulations. Chapter I of the same deals with the admission, The relevant extract runs as follows "Admission . Under the powers conferred by section 4-A of the Banaras Hindu University Act, 1915, as amended, and under the provisions of section 18 of this Act, the University hereby Institutes the following ordinances governing admission to Institutes-Faculties/College of the University :- (A) Institutes : Institute of Technology Institute of Medical Sciences Institute of Agricultural Sciences (B) Faculties/Colleges : Arts Social Sciences Law etc. etc......" 6. Thus the University has made distinction between the Institute on the one hand and Faculty/College on the other. The Institute deals with technical education whereas the Faculty/College deal with other than technical education. Admission in Institute is governed by Special Ordinances whereas admission in Faculty/College by General Ordinances. 7. etc......" 6. Thus the University has made distinction between the Institute on the one hand and Faculty/College on the other. The Institute deals with technical education whereas the Faculty/College deal with other than technical education. Admission in Institute is governed by Special Ordinances whereas admission in Faculty/College by General Ordinances. 7. Petitioners are claiming - reservation relying on sub-clause (3) of General Ordinances which runs as follows : (3) Sons and daughters of permanent in service Employee of B.H.U. A quota of supernumerary seats subjects to a maximum of 50% shall be reserved for admission of sons and daughters of the Permanent in service employees of B.H.U. in various courses provided they quality in the test. Further provided that :- (a) the admission under this category shall be made according to merit amongst themselves within the quota of seats earmarked for them ; and (b) they fulfil the minimum eligibility requirement Notwithstanding the above the candidate under this category shall also be entitled to such other weightage mentioned hereunder to which they may be eligible." 8. In the Special Ordinances, there is no reservation for the sons and daughters of the University employees. Petitioners are claiming reservation relying on the General Ordinances which control admission in Colleges and Faculties. Teachers of the University have made a representation on 21-12-1992 to the Chairman of the Academic Council claiming reservation of 10% supernumerary seats for their sons and daughters. 9. The Academic Council vide its resolution dated 27-8-1993 considered the question of adopting an uniform policy for granting weightage and reservation of supernumerary seats in various course of studies in the University for sons and daughters of "Permanent in service employees" of the University and it decided that a committee consisting of six members be constituted to examine and explore the possibility of making provision for reservation of seats on supernumerary basis for admission. The matter was referred to the Executive Council for consideration. 10. The Executive Council held its meeting on 11/12th September, 1993 regarding the recommendation of the Academic Council dated 27-8-1993. The matter was referred to the Executive Council for consideration. 10. The Executive Council held its meeting on 11/12th September, 1993 regarding the recommendation of the Academic Council dated 27-8-1993. It resolved, that- "The recommendation of the Academic Council Sub-Committee has been discussed in the Executive Council Meeting on 11/12th September, 1993, wherein the Executive Council has decided that the reference be made first as recommended by the Academic Council Sub -Committee to the Medical Council of India and oner professional bodies prior to the implementation of the above." The result is that the matter of granting reservation is still under consideration of the relevant authority. Unless a decision is taken, there is hardly any occasion for the petitioners to come to this Court, though the controversy has been set at rest by the Supreme Court in the case of Chins Das (supra) 11. The case of the petitioners is that the Sub Committee of Academic Council has no jurisdiction to tecom:nend for the prior permission of Medical Council of India before implementing the proposal. The reference is without jurisdiction the Entrance test for the medical course of the Institute of Medical Sciences is conducted by the University itself and the University has complete control over the admission in medical course 12. The submission is misconceived in as much as the University itself has no power to increase the number of seats or to grant reservation in the absence of any decision by the Medical Council In the matter of studies of Medical Sciences the Medical Council of India has got an effective control. Even if it is a fact that the University has recently increased the supernumerary quota (10 to 15%) for its employee's sons and daughters in other professional course i.e. Law, Agriculture and Fine Arts, that will not make any difference as there is no other body like the Medical Council of India controlling the teaching of Law, Agriculture or Fine Arts. The Bar Council of India or Bar Council of U. P. does not regulate the admission and teaching in the colleges. The Medical Council of India constituted under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 has fall control over the working of the Medical Colleges. Section 19 (A) (1) of the Act puts a rider on the power of the medical college in increasing the admission capacity. The Medical Council of India constituted under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 has fall control over the working of the Medical Colleges. Section 19 (A) (1) of the Act puts a rider on the power of the medical college in increasing the admission capacity. The number of seats cannot be increased without the permission of the Central Government. 13. Under section 19 of the Act the Medical Council of India can withdraw the recognition of the college if it; doss not conform to the standard prescribed by the Council. 14. The contention of Sri Siddheshwari Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, was that the impugned recommendation has been made at the instance of Dr. N. N. Khanna, Director of Institute of Medical Sciences. The allegations of malafide have been made in paragraphs 13, 16, 17, 18 and 29 of the writ petition but the petitioners Save failed to establish the same. Accordingly I am of the view that the impugned recommendation does not suffer from the vice of malafide. The record reveals that there is no reservation in the Institute of Medical Sciences (IMS) nor is there any reservation of seats in the Institute, of Technology of the University. These institutes impart technical education of a very high standard and admissions are made only through All India Entrance Examination. The reservation has not been made purposely with a view to maintain high standard of education. 15. In order to maintain excellence in medical colleges, the admissions other than the normal procedure would disturb the courses and would cause hindrance in the achievement of that excellence. 16. All the Medical Colleges/Medical Institutes are bound by the directives of Medical Council of India failing which the Medical Council of India is entitled to Initiate proceedings against the erring Institutes under section 19 (A) of the Medical Council of India Act. Special ordinances will override the General Ordinances. Accordingly the reservations made for the sons and daughters of Permanent in service employees of the University under the General Ordinances will have no application for the admission to the Institute of Medical Sciences, Technology and Agricultural Sciences. Since there is no reservation made in the Special Ordinances for the sons and daughters of the Permanent in service employees of the University, the petitioners are not entitled for any relief. 17. Since there is no reservation made in the Special Ordinances for the sons and daughters of the Permanent in service employees of the University, the petitioners are not entitled for any relief. 17. Since the leaned counsel for the parties have made their submission at great length I have discussed these points but I am of the view that this is an exercise in futility in as much as the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Orisis Das (supra) is the last word on the subject. Petitioners being the sons and daughters of the Permanent in service employees of the University are not entitled for any reservation. They cannot claim a separate class for themselves. Creating a new class for them has no nexus with the object sought to be achieved. Allowing reservation to them would be doing violence to the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 18. Article 14 enshrines the philosophy of equality before law. Petitioners being the sons and daughters off the University teachers are claiming a separate classification. Are they justified ? No. In order to pass the test of permissible classification three conditions must co-exist (i) the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons from those left out of the group (ii) the differentia must have rational relation to the object sought to be achieved (iii) the classification must be reasonable. It should not be arbitrary, illogical, unfair and unjust. Petitioners have failed to establish these ingredients. There is no basis of Creating a separate class for them. Petitioners have failed to establish their claim for separate classification. 19. For the reasons given above I find no merit in this writ petition. It is hereby dismissed. Petition dismissed.