SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1951 Supreme(SC) 30

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
9-4-1951
H.J. KANIA, C.J.I., FAZL ALI, PATANJALI SASTRI, MAHAJAN, B.K. MUKHERJEA, S.R. DAS AND BOSE, JJ.
The State of Madras
Versus
Smt. Champakam Dorairajan and another -- Resps.
Cases Nos. 270 & 271. of 1951.
Advocates appeared
Shri V. K. T. Chari, Advocate-General, Madras, (Shri R. Ganpathy Iyer, Advocate, with him) instructed by Shri P. A. Mehta, Agent - for the State, Shri Alladi Krishnaswami Iyer, Sr. Advocate, (Shri Alladi Kuppusami Iyer, Advocate with him) instructed by Shri M. S. K. Sastri, Agent - for Resps.

Advocates:
ALLADI KRISHNASVAMI IYER, M.S.K.Shastri, P.A.Mehta, R.Ganapathy Iyer, V.K.T.Chari

Headnote:FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES—ENFORCE- ABILITY IN COURT LAW INCONSISTENT WITH FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT VOID—PROMOTION OF EDUCATIONAL INTEREST UNDER ART. 46—DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES SUBORDINATE TO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS—CLASSIFICATION ON RELIGION, RACE, CASTE, RESERVATION OF ADMISSION INCONSISTENT WITH ART. 29(2) - ARTICLE 13 AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES - HELD ARTICLE 46 DOES NOT AFFECT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN ARTICLES 15(1) AND 29(2) - HELD, ARTICLE 46 DOES NOT AFFECT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN ARTICLES 15(1) AND 29(2) - ARTICLE 37 DECLARES STATE POLICY UNENFORCEABLE —THIS CANNOT OVERRIDE AND MAKE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN PART III UNENFORCEABLE IN VIEW OF EXPRESS PROVISION MAKING IT ENFORCEABLY BY WRIT, ORDERS, DIRECTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 32

       

Judgment

S. R. Das J - This judgment covers both case No. 270 of 1951 (State of Madras v. Srimathi Champakam Dorairajan) & case No. 271 of 1951 (State of Madras v. C. R. Srinivasan) which are appeals from the judgment passed by the H. C. of Judicature at Madras on 27-7-1950, on two separate applns. under Art. 226 of the Constitution complaining of breach of the petnrs. fundamental right to get admission into educational institutions maintained by the State.

2. The State of Madras maintains four Medical Colleges & only 330 seats are available for students in those four Colleges. Out of these 330 seats, 17 seats are reserved for students coming from outside the State & 12 seats are reserved for discretionary allotment by the State & the balance of the seats available are apportioned between four distinct groups of districts in the State.

3. Likewise, the State of Madras maintains four Engineering Colleges & the total number of seats available for students in those Colleges are only 395. Out of these, 21 seats are reserved for students coming from outside the State, 12 seats are reserved for discretionary allotment by the State & the balance of the seats available are apportioned between the same four distinct groups of districts.

4. For many years before the commencement of the Constitution, the seats in both the Medical Colleges & the Engineering Colleges so apportioned between the four distinct groups of districts used to be filled up according to certain proportions set forth in what used to be called the Communal G. O. Thus, for every 14 seats to be filled by the selection committee, candidates used to be selected strictly on the following basis : Non-Brahmins (Hindus) ... 6 Backward Hindus ... 2 Brahmins ... 2 Harijans ... 2 Anglo-Indians & Indian Christians ... 1 Muslims ... 1 Subject to the aforesaid regional & what have been claimed to be protective provisions selection from among the applicants from a particular community from one of the groups of districts used to be made on certain principles based on academic qualifications & marks obtained by the candidates In the case of the Medical Colleges, not less than 20 per cent. of the total number of seats available for students of the State were filled by women candidates separately for each region, it being open to the selection committee to admit a larger number of woman candidates in any region if qualified candidates were available in that region & if they were eligible for selection on merits vis-a-vis the men candidates in accordance with the general principles governing such admissions as laid down in those rules. It appears that the proportion fixed in the old Communal G. O. has been adhered to even after the commencement of the Constitution on 26-1-1950. Indeed, G. O. No. 2208, dated l6-6-1950, laying down rules for the selection of candidates for admission into the Medical Colleges substantially reproduces the communal proportion fixed in the old Communal G. O.

5. On 7-6-1950, Sm. Champakam Dorairajan made an appln. to the H. C. of Judicature at Madras under Art. 226 of the Constitution for protection of her fundamental rights under Art.15 (1) & Art.29 (2) of the Constitution & prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus or other suitable prerogative writ restraining the State of Madras & all officers & subordinates thereof from enforcing, observing, maintaining or following or requiring the enforcement, observance, maintenance or following by the authorities concerned of the notfn. or order generally, refd. to as the Communal G. O. in & by which admissions into the Madras Medical Colleges were sought or purported to be regulated in such manner as to infringe & involve the violation of her fundamental rights. From the affidavit filed in support of her petn. it does not appear that the petnr. had actually applied for admission in the Medical College. She states that on inquiry she came to know that she would not be admitted to the College as she belonged to the Br










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top