Judgment

B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE present proceedings for contempt of this Court were initiated suo motu when it was brought to our notice that the Government of Maharashtra has framed rules regarding admission to medical, dental and engineering courses reserving fifteen percent seats for NRIs/foreign students contrary to the orders of this Court dated 5/04/1994 and 13/05/1994. In response to the notice, an affidavit sworn to by Sri Arvind Choudhari, Under Secretary, Medical Education and Drugs Department, Government of Maharashtra was filed stating that the said rules were framed after obtaining the opinion of the Law and Judiciary Department to the effect that the number of seats permitted to be filled by NRIs. for the academic year 1994-95 under the orders of this Court is fifteen percent. On the basis of the said opinion, it was stated, the earlier orders fixing the said quota at ten percent were revised to fifteen percent. After perusing the said affidavit, this Court expressed a tentative view that there has been "an obvious attempt at overreaching the orders of this Court" and accordingly, issued notice to the Secretary/officer concerned in the Law and Judiciary Department who has tendered the said opinion to show cause why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him. The Principal Law Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra was directed to identify the officer/secretary with reference to records-vide orders dated 24/10/1994.

( 2 ) PURSUANT to the orders 24/10/1994, Sri Prabhakar Shivaji Mane, Secretary to the Government, Law and Judiciary Department filed an affidavit stating the following facts : he was appointed as a Civil Judge in the year 1978 and promoted as a District Judge in 1988. For two years, he worked as Additional Registrar, Bombay High Court. In May,1992, he was deputed to the Government of Maharashtra and appointed as Secretary in the Law and Judiciary Department. By the time of the said posting, he had "very little experience of dealing opinion work". On 7/06/1994, he received a Memo from the Under Secretary, M. W. and D. D. raising doubts as to the quota of NRI for the academic year 1994-95. He examined the matter with reference to the orders passed by this Court and came to the conclusion that the permitted quota for NRI is fifteen percent for the academic year 1994-95. Sri Mane stated, "i admit that there was some confusion in my mind as a result of reading the order of 13/05/1994 with the previous orders of this Honble Court dated 5/04/1994. I respectfully submit that this was a bona fide error on my part. . . . . . . I now realise that I should have been more careful in this matter but there was no intention on my part to over reach and flout the orders of this Honble Court or to give any wrong advice to the Department". Sri Mane enclosed to his affidavit the Memo received by him from the Medical Education Department. The Memo states that reading the orders of this Court dated 5/04/1994 with the order dated 13/05/1994 "it gives an impression that the NRI quota has been continued to be fifteen percent. The Law and Judiciary Department was asked to give its opinion on the issue. The memo is dated 7/06/1994. It is signed by Sri Arvind Choudhari, Under Secretary and Capt. Shaikh, Deputy Secretary. On the very next day, i. e. , 8/06/1994, Sri Mane expressed his opinion in the following words : "in view of above interpretation, it is clear that the view of ME and DD that the NRI quota is 15 Per Cent in respect of institutions other than minority institution and in cases of minority institutions it is raised to 10 Per Cent is correct". The reasoning in support of the said opinion is not only involved and confusing but is now admitted to be erroneous. We, therefore, think it unnecessary to refer to or set out the said reasoning.

( 3 ) AFTER perusing the affidavit of Sri Mane, this Court issued notices to Sri Arvind Choudhari, Capt. Shaikh and Sri B. G. More (Principal Secretary to Law and Ju