JUDGMENT

DUTT, J :— Special leave is granted in both these matters. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. These two appeals preferred by the appellants, Deepak Sibal and Miss Ritu Khanna, are directed against the common judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court whereby the High Court dismissed the two writ petitions filed by the appellants and also some other writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the rule for admission in the evening classes of the Three-Year LL.B. Degree Course conducted by the Department of Laws of the Punjab University.

3. The impugned rule that was published in the prospectus for the year 1988-89 relating to admission to 150 seats in the evening classes in the Three-Year LL.B. Degree Course is extracted as follows :

"Admission to evening classes is open only to regular employees of Government/Semi-Government institutions/affiliated colleges/ Statutory Corporations and Government Companies. A candidate applying for admission to the evening classes should attach No Objection/Permission letter from his present employer with his application for admission."

4. It is not disputed that there are 150 seats in the morning classes and another 150 seats in the evening classes. In both the morning and evening classes reservation has been made for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, backward classes, physically handicapped persons, outstanding forcemen and defence personnel. In the morning classes out of 150 seats, 64 seats are reserved for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, backward classes etc. and the remaining 86 seats are allotted to general students selected on merit basis. Similarly in the evening classes, the remaining 86 seats are also reserved for regular employees of Government/Semi-Government institutions etc., as mentioned in the impugned rule for admission.

5. The appellant, Deepak Sibal, passed the Bachelor of Commerce Examination from the University of Punjab in June, 1981 securing 61.5 per cent marks in the aggregate. On June 1, 1988, he was appointed to the post of Accountant in Agro Chem Punjab Ltd.with effect from June 2, 1988 on probation for a period of six months. Agro Chem Punjab Ltd. is stated to be a joint venture with Punjab Agro Corporation Ltd., Chandigarh, an Undertaking of the Punjab Government.

6. On July 18, 1988, the appellant, Deepak Sibal, applied for admission in the evening classes of the Punjab University for the Three-Year LL.B. Degree Course with a No Objection Certificate from his employer dated July 18, 1988. He was granted an interview sometime in the first week of August, 1988, but he was not selected. On enquiry, he came to know that although his position was 29 in the merit list, he was declared ineligible because he was an employee of a Public Limited Company and did not fall within the exclusive categories, as mentioned in the impugned rule, to which admission in the evening classes was restricted.

7. The other appellant, namely, Miss Ritu Khanna, passed the Bachelor of Arts Examination from the Punjab University securing 418 marks out of 650 marks. She was temporarily appointed to the post of Helper in the office of the Director, Water Resources, Punjab. She also applied for admission in the evening classes of the Three-Year LL.B. Degree Course of the University with all requisite certificates on July 18, 1988. She was granted an interview on July. 30, 1988 and although her position in the merit list was 19, she was not selected for admission on the ground that she was only a temporary employee.

8. Both the appellants, being aggrieved by the refusal of the University to admit them in the evening classes of the Three-Year LL.B. Degree Course, filed two separate writ petitions in the Punjab & Haryana High Court challenging, inter alia, the constitutional validity of the impugned rule. Five other writ petitions were also filed by the candidates who were refused admission in the evening Classes in view of the impugned rule. At the hearing of the writ peti