Judgment :- 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge the selection list for the admission conducted for the First year MBBS / BDS courses for 2012-2013 session in Government / self financing colleges and seeks to aside the same as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to conduct re-counseling for admission in the First year MBBS / BDS courses strictly in accordance with law and without any manner reducing the number of seats for open competition below 31% of the total number of seats. 2. When the matter came up on 24.07.2012, this court directed Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, learned Special Government Pleader to get instructions from the respondents. Accordingly, a counter affidavit, dated 30.7.2012 was filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and respondents 5 to 22. 3. The case of the petitioner was that he had secured 93.6% in the +2 examination conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Examination and had obtained 100% in Biology. His cut-off mark for the purpose of admission was 196/2000. He was hopeful for getting a seat through counseling either in the Government or Self financing colleges for MBBS course. As per the prospectus issued, the communal roster has been introduced for various communities. For the open competition, it was 31%, backward class – 30% within which 3.5% is for backward class Muslims, most backward class – 20%, scheduled caste – 18% and scheduled tribe – 1%. Apart from that 85% of seats were available for allocation by the State and 15% for all India quota. A few seats were also reserved for the children of freedom fighters and physically challenged students. From 5.7.2012, the counseling was started for admission to general category. The third respondent had released charts indicating number of seats available at the end of the counseling each day. To the surprise of the petitioner, the charts indicated that rather than following the reservation quotas in allotting seats, the third respondent was reallocating the seats from the open competition to reserved categories such as backward castes. For example, in Sivagangai Medical College, on 5.7.2012, there were 85 seats. On 7.7.2012, the number of seats remained was 85. But however, the number of seats in the open competition was reduced from 26 to 0, while the number of seats for backward caste has been increased to 42 from 23. For example, in Sivagangai Medical College, on 5.7.2012, there were 85 seats. On 7.7.2012, the number of seats remained was 85. But however, the number of seats in the open competition was reduced from 26 to 0, while the number of seats for backward caste has been increased to 42 from 23. The reservation as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu BC, SC and ST (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) Act, 1993 is per college basis. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking to challenge the method of allocation of seats to various communal categories as illegal. 4. According to the petitioner, under Section 4 of the Act, 31% of seats should be left for open competition. It cannot be filled up from reserved communities. The said action initiated do not fall either under Article 15(4) or 15(5) of the Constitution. There was a total non application of mind. Therefore, the counsel for the petitioner contended that under the provisions of the Act, the reservation in respect of the institutions would mean a particular college. Even in the prospectus, they have set out the vacancy position of various Government Medical colleges as per college-wise and quotawise. The petitioner also produced the latest vacancy position after the increase of intake in the colleges. Hence he contended that reservation should be in respect of each college and not in respect of over all number of seats in the entire State which violates the provisions of the said Act. 5. The contentions raised by the petitioner cannot be countenanced by this court. In the prospectus issued by the respondents for admission to MBBS course for the year 20122013, in paragraph Nos.24 and 34, the rule of reservation has been indicated, which reads as follows : “VI.COUNSELLING PROCEDURE (SINGLE WINDOW SYSTEM):- 24. The selection will be made on merit basis and by Counselling applying the rule of reservation by the Government of Tamil Nadu as follows :- Open Competition - 31% Backward Class - 30% Most Backward Class - 20% Scheduled Caste - 18% Scheduled Tribe - 1% Within 30% reservation for Backward Classes 3.5% will be provided for Muslims and 16% of seats out of 18% quota earmarked to Scheduled Caste, shall be allocated to the Arunthathiyar Community. BC, BCM, MBC / DNC, SC, SCA, ST candidates are eligible for Selection under Open Competition also as per merit in addition to the reservation made for those categories. 34. The movement of candidate from one category to another category and from one college to another college will be based on the merit following the rule of reservation.” 6. The persons who made applications, thereafter, were called for counseling for allotment of a specific college and that the choice keeps shifting depending upon the merit ranking and communal ranking. Therefore, there is likelihood of reduction or increase in respect of seat allotted to a particular college. The meritorious order in the open competition candidates is maintained and after the open competition category candidates, the allotment of seats of reserved category candidates will be in the order of merit. Therefore, neither there is violation of the provisions of 1993 Act nor it affects the reservation of the petitioner under Article 15 of the Constitution. In this context, it is necessary to refer to the following averments in the counter affidavit which reads as follows : “The total apportionment of seats for 18 Government Medical Colleges following rule of reservation is as follows : Hence the 565 seats earmarked under open competition in 18 medical colleges are filled up by virtue of merit as per published Counseling Schedule for allotment of MBBS seats for 2012-13 session irrespective of community as stated in the Prospectus. As a standard procedure followed for years, the apportionment of seats is made for all medical colleges and also with regard to sanctioned strength of the college concerned. For example the apportionment for MMC is noted as follows : During Counselling, candidates are allotted uto 565 seats (overall OC component) in various Medical Colleges by virtue of merit. There will be an occasion when the above OC Component seats of 44 are over, the next high ranking candidates, if he/she wishes to opt for MMC in a community vacancy to which he/she belongs will be allotted to the community vacancy. For example, if he/she happens to be BC candidate, a seat in BC strength in MMC will be reduced. But overall community vacancy reduction should be started only after exhausting all Open category seats of 565 are over. For example, if he/she happens to be BC candidate, a seat in BC strength in MMC will be reduced. But overall community vacancy reduction should be started only after exhausting all Open category seats of 565 are over. Hence in order to maintain the Backward class quotient intact, the reduced vacancy in BC community in MMC is added to the component of BC in Government Sivagangai Medical College to compensate and maintain the overall BC component. One seat in Open competition in Government Sivagangai Medical College is reduced, so as to maintain the OC quotient. Suppose, if the practice of allotting a meritorious candidate within the zone of Open category in a community vacancy is not followed, it will lead to a situation where lower ranking BC candidate can get a BC seat in MMC. By adopting this loop method, the meritorious order in open competition candidates will be maintained and after this Open Competition category candidates, the allotment of reserved category candidates will be in the order of merit. Hence the application of rule of reservation is fully implemented following the clauses mentioned in the Prospectus issued for 2012-13 session.” 7. In the light of the stand taken by the respondents and there being no illegality in the method adopted for reservation of seats and over all percentage reservation having fulfilled, there is no case made out for interference with the impugned selection by the respondents for the MBBS course. Hence the writ petition will stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions stand closed.