JUDGMENT D. Raju, C. J.—The above writ petition has been filed seeking for quashing the merit-list drawn by the first respondent in respect of the category of backward area candidates as published in Annexure P-6 and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to redraw the merit list as per the criteria laid down in the prospectus for the category of backward area seats in MBBS and BDS courses reserved for candidates of backward area in seriatim (a) then (b) and finally (c) and also for a direction to allow the petitioner to be present for the counselling to be done for the category of backward area candidates, 2. The case of the petitioner is that she is a permanent resident of village Khanot, Baldwara Post, Sarkaghat Tehsil, Mandi District, that she passed her Middle standard examination from H.R Board of School Education while studying in Government Senior Secondary School, Sundla, Salooni Tehsil, Chamba District, in March 1993 with first division, that, thereafter, she passed her Matriculation examination in March 1995 from the Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education while studying in Government Senior Secondary School, Sundla, referred to above, and finally she passed her Senior Secondary examination (12th class) in the year 1997 from Punjab School Education Board with first division. She also obtained a certificate in Form Appendix A-7 that Matriculation examination and Middle examination were passed by her while studying from Government Senior Secondary School, Sundla, which falls under backward area under Notification No. PLG -F (BASP)-1/95 dated 16.6.1995 issued by the Financial Commissioner (Planning), H.P. Shimla, from the Tehsildar, Sundla. The petitioner submitted her application for the common entrance test conducted by the Himachal Pradesh University for admission to the professional Graduate MBBS/BDS Courses for the session 1998-99. The common entrance test was conducted on 28.6.1998 and the petitioner secured 197 marks out of 300 Marks. On the basis of the results of the common entrance test the first respondent prepared merit-list of each category of candidates including the waiting list of candidates and such results were said to have been published in various Newspapers having circulation in the Himachal Pradesh. A copy of such news cutting containing the results has been filed as Annexure P-6. From the prospectus, it could be seen that consideration for admission would be generally under Group-A (Reserved Categories) and Group B (Unreserved Categories). A copy of such news cutting containing the results has been filed as Annexure P-6. From the prospectus, it could be seen that consideration for admission would be generally under Group-A (Reserved Categories) and Group B (Unreserved Categories). So far as the reserved categories are concerned, item No. (7) pertains to reservation in respect of candidates from backward area. Besides notifying the number of reserved seats for such category in different colleges, it has been stipulated in the prospectus with reference to the criteria to be satisfied to claim the benefit of such reservation in respect of backward categories as follows : "Backward areas seats in MBBS and BDS reserved for candidates belonging to backward area as notified by the H.P. Government from time to time in the following manner :— (a) Candidates who have passed atleast two examinations i.e. Primary/ Middle/Hlgh/+2 from the schools located in the backward area. (b) If no such candidate is available then a candidate from backward area. (c) In case no such candidate is available for the backward area seats, the same will go to the General categories candidates." 3. The grievance of the petitioner as could be seen from the petition and as elaborated at the time of arguments by the learned Counsel, is that the merit-list prepared by the first respondent for the category of seats reserved for backward area has been wrongly drawn and published, that the procedure and conditions stipulated in the prospectus has not been properly observed and that according to the petitioner, merit-list was to be drawn firstly amongst the candidates, who have passed atleast two examination, Primary/Middle/High 10+2 from the schools located in the backward area and in the present case, the said procedure and criteria was not followed and instead the merit-list has been prepared from amongst the candidates belonging to backward area by following condition (b), noticed above, and, therefore, the results published in respect of that reserved category should vitiate. The further averment was that though the candidates having Roll Nos. 6873, 6923, 6803 and 6999 belong to backward area, they do not fulfil the condition of at least passing two examinations from schools situated in backward area and similarly those bearing Roll Nos. The further averment was that though the candidates having Roll Nos. 6873, 6923, 6803 and 6999 belong to backward area, they do not fulfil the condition of at least passing two examinations from schools situated in backward area and similarly those bearing Roll Nos. under waiting list 6997 and 6996 also do not belong to the category of candidates who passed two examinations from schools located in the backward area, and, be therefore, the list is liable to the quashed in respect of this reserved category of seats and the list as a consequence thereof has to be redrawn. Though some other points have also been raised, they have not been pursued at the time of hearing and the only ground on which the claim of the petitioner was projected proceeded on the interpretation to be placed on the criteria in the prospectus which should govern the selection for admission to this reserved category of candidates from backward area and according to the petitioner, as pointed out earlier, first the candidates who have studied and passed at least two examinations from the schools located in the backward area must be considered though such candidates are not having permanent residence at such backward area. 4. The first respondent-University filed a reply contending not only that the writ petition is premature since the results declared of the test was only tentative merit list, but she had not submitted a certificate, when applied, from the competent authority that she is an ordinary resident of a notified backward area and the mere fact that she passed Middle and Matriculation examination from the schools located in notified backward area will not mean that she hails from the notified backward area and it is not her case even at this stage that she hails from the notified backward area for the reason that the name of her village as given in the petition also does not fall in a notified backward area. The further plea of the respondent University is that these issues could be effectively determined at time of counselling when certificates are to be produced and final list will be prepared. The further plea of the respondent University is that these issues could be effectively determined at time of counselling when certificates are to be produced and final list will be prepared. On the scope and purport of the guidelines laid down for the selection of candidates from the backward area, it is contended for the first respondent, the candidates concerned must hail or come from backward areas and it is out of such candidates the priority has to be in respect of such who fall under category (a) or category (b) in that order and a candidate falling under category (a) must have preference on those falling under category (b). 5. The writ petitioner filed a rejoinder contending that the certificate in Form Appendix A-7 obtained and produced by the petitioner itself contained a statement that the petitioner ordinarily resided at Sundla with effect from 1992 to 1995, and that was the period when the father of the petitioner was posted to serve in that area and the petitioner remained with him. While traversing the claim of the first respondent that the published list was a tentative list only, it has been contended that the respondents have finalised the merit list and that too in violation of the guidelines laid down in the prospectus and consequently the petitioner reiterated the stand taken in the writ petition. 6. The petitioner also filed CMP 1471/98 seeking for amendment of the writ petition challenging the final selection of some of the candidates, which, according to the writ petitioner has been made in contravention of the guidelines, noticed above. 7. Mr. V.D. Khidtta, learned Counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the stand taken in the pleadings, as noticed above, strenuously contended that it is enough if a candidate had passed atleast two examinations from the schools located in the backward area and she necessarily need not be a permanent resident or hail from such place to get the benefit under the reserved category in respect of candidates from backward area and, therefore, the petitioner having passed two examinations Middle and Matriculation from the schools located in the backward area, she is entitled to be preferably considered even to those candidates actually hailing from backward area and consequently the claim of the petitioner has to be allowed. In support of his plea the learned Counsel relied upon certain decisions, to which a reference could be made, hereinafter. 8. In AIR 1963 S.C. 1521, Mst Jagir Kaur and another v. Jaswant Singh, the apex court was dealing with the mantainability of an application under Section 488, Criminal Procedure Code, and while construing subsection (8) of Section 488, it has laid down that proceedings under the Section may be taken against any person in any district where he resides or is, or where he last resided with his wife, or, as the case may be, the mother of the illegitimate child. Their Lordships of the apex Court construed, in the light of the cognate expression used, the word resides to mean as inclusive of temporary residence also. In AIR 1956 Pun 188, Mohan Singh v. Lajya Ram and others, which is a judgment of a Single Bench, while construing Section 20 of the Civil Procedure Code and particularly, the words actually resides, it was observed that residence may be legal and technical or actual or physical and it means actually resides as distinguished from merely constructive or legal residence or place where a person resides in the legal and technical sense. Reference has also been made to the decisions reported in AIR 1942 Mad 666, V. Balakrishna Naidu v. Mrs. B. Sakuntala Bai; AIR 1953 Mad 78, Sampoornam v. N. Sundaresan and AIR 1929 Bom 410, Khairunnissa, in re. which arose under the old Criminal Procedure Code, which have been also noticed by their Lordships of the apex Court in the decision reported in AIR 1963 S.C. 1521 (supra). 9. Per contra, Mr S.S. Mittal, the learned Counsel for the first respondent and the learned Deputy Advocate-General for the second respondent contended that it is not merely the passing of two examinations from the schools located in the backward area that entitles a candidate to claim the benefit of reservation under Category 7 but the passing of such examination to claims the benefit of clause (a) also to be by a candidate from a backward area and that is why out of the category of backward area candidates preference among them is to be given to those who passed at least two examinations from colleges located in the backward area also and, therefore, there is no merit, whatsoever, in the claim of the writ petitioner. 10. 10. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Counsel appearing on either side. In our view the submissions on behalf of the petitioner not only purports to over simplify the matter but if countenanced will be counter productive in result and defeat the very object and purpose of the reservation. The candidates from backward area should mean those who are either hailing or permanently settled or at least have the intention to reside permanently in the place and have permanent residence in such area notified from time to time by the Government to be backward area. The object of making a further classification among candidates from backward area seem to be to give a preference, among such candidates from backward area, to those who really undergone studies also in schools located in the backward area for the obvious reason that such persons suffer a double disadvantage and it is only keeping in view the same a candidate simplicitor hailing from a backward area is classified for less favourable treatment than the candidate who not only hails from a backward area but in addition thereto has also studied and passed who examinations in schools located in the backward area. Otherwise, if the object was to have two categories of candidates from backward area and treating one less favourably than the other, the very classification would be seriously vulnerable for a challenge on the ground of discrimination. 11. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the word resides must be construed either liberally as ordinarily resident or residence even during a temporary sojourn for a particular number of years only, does not merit our acceptance. When the purpose, aim and object of the reservation is kept into consideration, the primary consideration in selection of candidates for admission to medical colleges must be merit and that is and that should be the genera! rule and any departure is to be made for sufficient and justifying reason. Taking into account the social and economic variable factors in the context of educational opportunities, variation and deviation is permitted from the said general rule. The reservation under the category backward area1 has been purposely and deliberately meant to be reserved for candidates belonging to backward area as notified by the Himachal Pradesh Government from time to time. Taking into account the social and economic variable factors in the context of educational opportunities, variation and deviation is permitted from the said general rule. The reservation under the category backward area1 has been purposely and deliberately meant to be reserved for candidates belonging to backward area as notified by the Himachal Pradesh Government from time to time. The words belong to Imply, in our view, something more than the idea of casual association and involve continuity and connote even something more than mere birth in a place. In our view, having regard to the scheme of reservation and more particularly the purpose and object of a particular categorisation in favour of the candidates belonging to backward areas and more so being a concession and privilage the same has to be strictly construed not only to achieve the real object behind the classification of reservation but also ensure that it is not abused by clever manipulations or machinations. It is only with that intention any reservations in respect of backward classes or areas are construed to confine the privilage or concession conferred to those who hail permanently from a particular place either by virtue of their nativity coupled with continuous residence or continued permanent residence only thereby denying such benefits of reservations to those who had no intention to stay permanently or indefinitely in a particular place when the benefits are so designed to be inter-linked with the persons concerned belonging to a particular place. The guideline or criteria laid down for availing of the concession of reservation in favour of candidates belonging to backward area, extracted supra, will show that basically and primarily one who stakes claim against such reserved category of seats must belong to any one of the notified backward area, and clauses (a) and (b) only indicate the further order of preference among the larger category of candidates belonging to backward area, while clause (c), stipulates the consequences of no one candidate being available to avail of the benefit of reservation. From the mere fact that of the candidates belonging to backward area a preferential class is carved out in favour of those who in addition has studied and passed two examinations in the schools located in the notified backward area, it cannot be said that the status of belonging to backward area has to be conferred upon for the mere studying in the schools located in backward areas alone. The stipulation enumerating the essential conditions to be satisfied by any one to claim the benefit of reservation against this category cannot be construed and interpreted even on the basis of the loosely worded form of certificate prescribed for the purpose but instead should strictly construed keeping in view the real and ultimate object to be achieved—which as indicated by us earlier is a deviation from the normal mode of selection by merit of all contesting candidates in open competition. Any interpretation otherwise or accepting the plea of the petitioner would perpetuate abuse and misuse by manipulation, at times going to the extent of defeating genuine candidates, who really deserve the benefit of reservation for this category of candidates. 12. Persons not really hailing from notified backward areas but living in areas adjacent thereto can manipulate and take some examinations while at the same time undertaking the crucial examination in modern schools in developed area. 12. Persons not really hailing from notified backward areas but living in areas adjacent thereto can manipulate and take some examinations while at the same time undertaking the crucial examination in modern schools in developed area. If abuse of this particular category of reservation is to be prevented and the benefit thereof is to be ensured to really deserving candidates belonging to backward area, it has to be necessarily and in our view as is inherently in built in the scheme of the reservation itself, to be held that nativity-cum-permanent residence has to be insisted upon as a must and basic as well primary condition to be satisfied and if persons satisfying this primary condition is found to have also studied and passed two examinations also from schools located in such backward area, they have to be treated more favourably and in preference to those who satisfy merely the basic or primary condition only and such persons satisfying primary conditions only will be placed only second in the ladder or priority for consideration, In substance, what is stipulated to be an additional and tilting factor to show preference among a common and homogeneous category of candidates belonging to backward areas cannot itself be considered to be the main and only sufficient criteria to be branded as persons belonging to backward areas. Even, that apart we are not satisfied that the petitioner could claim to have satisfied the required norms. Admittedly, the petitioner was studying in the backward areas only during the period from 1992 to 1995 (Annexure P8-certificate) and did Middle and Higher course of studies whereas for plus two which is the essential qualifying examination, the petitioner studied and passed only from Punjab School Education Board area. Even otherwise, the village from which the petitioner hailed and the address given in the petition, will show that such area of the petitioner is not one of the notified area. The petitioner, could not be held to have taken up residence in the notified backward area with the intention of having the same as permanent residence since she was in that area only for four years between 1992 to 1995. Consequently, even on this score we are unable to countenance the claim of the petitioner. 13. The petitioner, could not be held to have taken up residence in the notified backward area with the intention of having the same as permanent residence since she was in that area only for four years between 1992 to 1995. Consequently, even on this score we are unable to countenance the claim of the petitioner. 13. For all the reasons stated above, we are unable to hold that the petitioner is entitled to be considered for admission to the Graduate MBBS/BDS courses as against the seats reserved for candidates belonging to the backward areas. The writ petition, therefore, fails and shall stand rejected. No costs. CWP No. 1471/98 In the light of the above conclusion of ours, there is no need to allow the amendment, as prayed for and the present application is rejected, CWP No. 1206/98 IN view of the dismissal of the writ petition, the present application is also dismissed. Petition dismissed.