S. B. SINHA, J. ( 1 ) ALL these appeals being inter-related were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment, Keeping in view the urgency of the matter, although paper book has been filed only in M. A. T. No. 3264 of 1997, and as further all the writ applications involved the same question, we dispense with the formalities of filing paper books and other formalities in the other appeals. We may further mention that the learned counsel for the parties agree that although these appeals 7 have been listed under the heading "applications", the entire appeals may be disposed of- ( 2 ) THESE appeals are directed against a common judgment dated 10th September, 1997 passed by a learned single Judge in W. P. 8943 (W) of 1997, W. P. 8614 (W) of 1997 and W. P. 1121 of 1997. ( 3 ) THE petitioners were candidates for admission in post-graduate medical courses under the University of Calcutta. Admittedly, the total number of seats for the said courses is 443, out of which 61 seats are allotted to All India quota and the remaining 382 seats are to be filled up by the University of Calcutta inasmuch as admission to 75% of total number of seats in different post-graduate courses is conducted by University of Calcutta while admission to the remaining 25% of the seats is open to candidates selected through All India Entrance Examination, Eighty seats are reserved as West Bengal Government quota out of 382 seats. The said seats are to be filled up from amongst the candidate in the West Bengal Health Service/west Bengal Medical Education Service sponsored by the Government of West Bengal. Admittedly, the State has issued a notification on 12-9-95, whereby and whereunder 22% of seats were directed to be reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates and 6% of seats were directed to be reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidates. By another notification dated 22-5-96, it was directed that the reservation made in the said notification shall apply in respect of the admission to the post-graduate courses also. Admittedly for the purpose of admission of students in the post-graduate courses examination were held on 29-3-97 and the merit list was published on 16th April, 1997. Admittedly, a separate merit list was published in respect of the reserved category candidates. Admittedly for the purpose of admission of students in the post-graduate courses examination were held on 29-3-97 and the merit list was published on 16th April, 1997. Admittedly, a separate merit list was published in respect of the reserved category candidates. It also stands admitted that the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidates were given opportunity of counselling first as regards the choice of the discipline before the general candidates. On 1-5-97, after the process of counselling was complete, admission took place. The writ petitioners respondents were also admitted but according to them, they had not been admitted in the discipline of their choice. The writ petitions were filed on 7-5-97 and the same were admitted on a limited question as would appear from the following order :-"it is recorded that the parties agree that the facts are not in dispute in so far as it relates to the reservation of seats on account of SC/st in the West Bengal Government quota for admission into the course of Post Graduate Medical Degree and Diploma for the year 1997. The only issue which needs to be decided is whether such a reservation is permissible in law. The matter is accordingly fixed for hearing on the basis of the available papers and records on Thursday at 2 P. M. ". ( 4 ) THE principal question which arose for consideration before the learned trial judge was "whether reservation was permissible in respect of scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidates out of the Government of West Bengal quota. " The learned trial Judge in the impugned judgment upon consideration of various decisions of the Apex Court, inter alia, held that the policy of reservation both vertical and horizontal is permissible in terms of Article 15 (4) of the Constitution of India and further held that reservation in the service quota is also permissible. Having held so, the learned Judge proceeded to examine the process followed in giving option to the candidates in the Government quota for choice of subjects. The learned Judge observed :-"i am again making it clear that separate counselling even on priority basis from the list of qualified SC/st candidates is perfectly good so far as the streams where reservation of at least one seat in the concerned steam is permissible in accordance with the prescribed method of calculation. The learned Judge observed :-"i am again making it clear that separate counselling even on priority basis from the list of qualified SC/st candidates is perfectly good so far as the streams where reservation of at least one seat in the concerned steam is permissible in accordance with the prescribed method of calculation. But apart from that, the SC/st candidates under the prescribed procedure cannot get priority in the matter of counselling in respect of those streams where reservation of even at least one seat in the particular stream is not per-missible under the prescribed method of calculation. As we have seen in some of the streams in the Government quota reservation of even one seat streamwise is not permissible under the prescribed method of calculation and therefore the University was not justified in reserving one seat for the reserve category candidates in those earmarked streams under the Government quota, as already enumerated by me, by their purported administrative direction which is inconsistent with the reservation policy and the method of calculation provided by the concerned Government notifications. "8 ( 5 ) MR. Biswas, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, inter alia, submits that the writ petitions having been admitted on a limited question and the learned trial Judge having answered the principal question in favour of the appellants, went wrong in going into the merit of the matter and issuing the impugned directions as would appear from paragraph 18 of the judgment. The learned counsel contends that it was not within the domain of the learned trial Judge to consider as to whether calculation made by the University as regards the seats available in the reserve quota was correct or not. The learned counsel has also drawn our attention to various charts to show that the University strictly followed the rules of reservation. ( 6 ) MR. Bhudeb Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, has supported the contentions made by Mr. Biswas. ( 7 ) MR. B. R. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners-respondents, on the other hand, submitted that notification providing for reservation in the government quota is unconstitutional. ( 6 ) MR. Bhudeb Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, has supported the contentions made by Mr. Biswas. ( 7 ) MR. B. R. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners-respondents, on the other hand, submitted that notification providing for reservation in the government quota is unconstitutional. ( 8 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the submission of the learned counsel for the writ petitioner-respondents that the reservation in the Government quota is not permissible cannot be accepted in view of the fact that neither any appeal has been preferred therefrom nor vires of the notification in question was the subject-matter of the writ application. We agree with the learned trial Judge keeping in view the fact that admittedly all the seats in different disciplines having not been filled up, inter alia, owing to non-availability of eligible Scheduled Caste Candidates that the same may be filled up. Mr. Biswas, when questioned, very fairly submitted that University has got requisite infrastructure to admit certain number of students in the disciplines mentioned at page 93 of the paper book. According to the learned counsel himself, the seats were allotted against each discipline keeping in view the infrastructure available with the University to teach number of students therein. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that it will not be in the interest of justice that certain seats in certain displines should remain vacant although candidates may and indeed have expressed their choice in respct thereof. However, we do not agree with that part of the finding of the learned trial Judge, whereby and whereunder a direction had been issued to consider the cases of the writ petitioners only against such vacant seats. ( 9 ) HAVING given our anxious consideration, we are of the opinion that if the directions given by the learned trial Judge are sustained thus students who were not able to approach this Court would suffer, and thus the same would result in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. ( 10 ) WE, therefore, in modification of the order passed by the learned trial Judge direct :-1 ). ( 10 ) WE, therefore, in modification of the order passed by the learned trial Judge direct :-1 ). The appellant University shall within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment shall notify the vacancies of the seats in reservation quota available in respect of each discipline. 2. Within one week from such publication the students who are not satisfied with the allotment of their respective discipline, may file their options indicating the discipline of their choice. 3. University on receipt of such options from the candidates (irrespective of the fact as to whether they are writ petitioners or not) shall pass appropriate orders on the basis of the merit list and upon strictly following the extant rules within three weeks thereafter. ( 11 ) THIS order shall not, however, stand in the way of the University to fill up the resultant vacant seats by admitting students in terms of the Rules from amongst the eligible candidates, if any, so as to ensure that all the 443 seats are filled up. ( 12 ) THE aforementioned directions are to be followed by the University for the session in question as we have passed this order in the interest of all concerned including the students undergoing studies as also keeping in view the fact that public fund would be wasted if the seats are kept vacant. ( 13 ) WITH the aforementioned modification, all the appeals are disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. ( 14 ) LET a plain copy of this judgment duly counter-signed by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be handed over to Mr. Dipankar Dutta, learned 9 Counsel for the appellant on usual undertaking. ( 15 ) RONOJIT KUMAR MITRA, J. :- I agree. Order accordingly.