SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.A. VAIDIALINGAM AND K.K. MATHEW, JJ.
The State of A.P. and others, (in all the Appeals), Appellants
Versus
1. U. S. V. Balaram, (In C. A. No. 901 of 1971), 2. O. Venkateshwara Rao (In C. A. No. 902 of 1971), 3. Y. Suryanarayana (In C. A. No. 903 of 1971), Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 901 to 903 of 1971, D/- 28-1-1972.
Advocates appeared
Mr. S. V. Gupte, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. P. S. Shankar and P. P. Rao, Advocate with him) (In C. A. No. 901 of 1971), and M/s. P. S. Shankar and P. P. Rao, Advocates (In C. As. Nos. 902 and 903 of 1971), for Appellants; Mr. V. M. Tarkunde, Sr. Advocate, (Mr. K. Rajendra Choudhary Advocate, with him) (In C. A. No. 901 of 1971), M/s. G. Narasimhulu and P. A. Choudhary Advocates (In C. A. No. 902 of 1971) and Mr. A. Subba Rao Advocate (In C. A. No. 903 of 1971) for Respondents.
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14, 15, 16, 29, 46, 341, 342 - Selection Of Candidates For Admission - Reservation Of Seats In Professional Colleges - Candidates eligible for admission to Integrated M - B - B - S Course being largely taken from students who had passed qualifying examination for Pre-University Course and those who had passed Higher Secondary Course rules provided for a pattern of earmarking seats for students according to qualifying examination taken by them - It may be mentioned at this stage that H - S - C Course students are called Multipurpose candidates since they pass their examinations from Multipurpose Schools - But there was a condition that such Rules or orders should have been made by Government before finalisation and communication of selection of candidates - Held, This has to be emphasised because Government should not act on basis that once a class is considered as a backward class it should continue to be backward for all time - If once a class appears to have reached a stage of progress from which it could be safely inferred that no further protection is necessary State will do well to review such instances and suitably revise list of Backward Classes - In fact it was noticed by this Court in that candidates of Backward Classes had secured nearly 50 of seats in general pool - On this ground this Court did not hold that further reservation made for Backward Classes is invalid - Appeals partly allowed.
Judgement
VAIDIALINGAM, J.:- These three appeals, in which the State of Andhra Pradesh is the first appellant, by special leave, are directed against the judgment and order dated May 13, 1971 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, striking down Rule 9, in the Rules relating to the selection of candidates for admission to the Integrated M. B. B. S. Course in the Government Medical Colleges in the Andhra area, issued under G. O. No. 1648/Health dated July 23, 1970 as also G. O. No. 1793/Education dated September 23, 1970, regarding reservation of seats in professional colleges, for Backward Classes together with the annexure to the said notification containing the list of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes. The Addl. Director of Medical and Health Services, Hyderabad and Principal, Government Medical College, Guntur, are also appellants Nos. 2 and 3 respectively in the appeals.
2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh by G. O. No. 1648/Health dated July 23, 1970 announced Rules for the selection and admission of students to the Integrated M.B.B.S. Course in the Government Medical Colleges, in the Andhra area. The rules provided a pattern of allotment of seats by reference to certain qualifying examinations. The candidates eligible for admission to the Integrated M. B. B. S. Course, being largely taken from the students who had passed the qualifying examination for the Pre-University Course and those who had passed the Higher Secondary Course (Multipurpose), the rules provided for a pattern of earmarking seats for the students according to the qualifying examination taken by them. It may be mentioned at this stage that the H. S. C. Course (Multipurpose) students are called Multipurpose candidates since they pass their examinations from Multipurpose Schools.
3. Rule 8 dealt with the pattern of allotment of seats in respect of qualifying examination, Rule 9 outlined the procedure for selection. Rule 10 provided that all the reservations would be subject to the order of merit of marks obtained in the entrance test by the students in the relevant category of reservation, namely, P. U. C. and H. S. C. Rule 2 provided that the selections made under the Rules will be subject to any rules or orders that may be made in regard to the reservation of seats for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes of students, having regard to the recommendations made by the Andhra Pradesh Backward Classes Commission. But there was a condition that such Rules or orders should have been made by the Government before the finalisation and communication of the selection of candidates.
4. On June 20, 1970, the Backward Classes Commission appointed by the State, a couple of years back, made its report regarding the various categories of persons who are to be treated as belonging to Backward Classes and recommended reservation of 30 of seats to persons belonging to the Backward Classes. The State by G. O. No. 1793/Education, dated September 23, 1970 announced reservation of 25 of the seats in the M. B. B. S. Course for candidates belonging to the various Backward Classes enumerated therein on the basis of the report of the Backward Classes Commission. In or about August, 1970, the validity of entrance provided under the Rules issued by G. O. No. 1648 of 1970 was challenged before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in a batch of writ petitions Nos. 3859, 3881, 3955 and 4052 of 1970. The challenge was on ground that the State had no power or authority to determine admission by reference only to the result of the entrance test thereby ignoring the result of the qualifying examinations taken by the candidates. Those writ petitions were dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court on September 5, 1970. But on Letters Patent Appeals by the candidates, a Division Bench of the High Court on September 18, 1970 reversed the order of the Single Judge and struck down the provisions regarding holding of entrance test for admission to Gove
Chitra Ghosh v. Union of India
D N Chanchala v. State of Mysore
State of Marashtra v. Lok Shikshan Sanatha
Minor P Rajendran v. State of Madras
Minor A Periakuruppan v. State of Tamil Nadu
referred to : State of A P v. P Sagar
State of A P v. Lavu Narendra Math
affirmed : M R Balaji v. State of Mysore
Chitralekha v. State of Mysore
relied upon : Triloki Nath Tiju v. State J and K
State of Madras v. Smt Champakan Dorairajan
Minor P Rajenitm v. Stall of Madras
Minor A Peakaruppan v. State of Tamil Nadu
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.