Back
1984 Supreme(Bom) 206
Bombay High Court
GINWALA,PATEL
Anil - Appellant
Versus
Dean, Government Medical College, Nagpur - Respondent
Decided On : 07/19/1984
A.M. Gordey, for Petitioner:A.M. Tayade. A.G.P. (for Nos. 1 and 3), for Respondents.
The reservation for backward classes under Article 15(4) of the Constitution is a guaranteed minimum number of seats, and if they secure more seats on merit, it does not affect the reserved quota.
Headnote:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - ARTICLE 15(4) - ARTICLE 29(2) - RESERVATION OF SEATS FOR BACKWARD CLASSES - INTERPRETATION OF RULE 5(A)(D) OF THE RULES FOR ADMISSION TO GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGES - VALIDITY OF THE RULE - HELD, THE RULE IS VALID.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, belonging to the Other Backward Communities (OBC), challenged the validity of sub-clauses (b) and (d) of Clause A of Rule 5 of the Rules made by the State Government for regulating admission to Government Medical Colleges. Sub-clause (d) provided that the 10% reservation for OBC candidates would not be an overall ceiling and they could secure more than 10% seats on the basis of merit. However, if the admissions they secured on merit were less than 10%, there should be a reservation for them to the extent of the shortfall below 10%.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that sub-clause (d) of Clause A of Rule 5 was valid and did not violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 15(1) and 29(2) of the Constitution. The court interpreted the rule to mean that the reservation for OBC candidates was a guaranteed minimum number of seats, and if they secured more seats on merit, it would not affect the reserved quota. This interpretation was necessary to maintain a balance between the interests of the backward classes and the advanced classes.
Issues: 1. Whether sub-clause (d) of Clause A of Rule 5 of the Rules for admission to Government Medical Colleges was valid. 2. Whether the rule violated the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 15(1) and 29(2) of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that Article 15(4) of the Constitution, which allows for special provisions for the advancement of backward classes, is an enabling provision and does not confer any right on such classes. 2. The court interpreted sub-clause (d) of Clause A of Rule 5 to mean that the reservation for OBC candidates was a guaranteed minimum number of seats, and if they secured more seats on merit, it would not affect the reserved quota. 3. The court held that this interpretation was necessary to maintain a balance between the interests of the backward classes and the advanced classes.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition and upheld the validity of sub-clause (d) of Clause A of Rule 5 of the Rules for admission to Government Medical Colleges.
GINWALA J.:- The petitioner, who was one of the applicants for admission to the Government Medical College in Nagpur, challenges the validity of sub-cls.(b) and (d) of Cl.A of Rule 5 of the Rules made by the State Government (respondent No. 3) for regulating admission to the Government Medical Colleges for the year 1983-1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The portion of the rule which is relevant for our purpose is in the following terms : -
"5 Reservation of Seats
A. Reservation of Backward Classes -
The percentage of seats reserved at each college will be as follows :-
Serial No
Category Percentage of seats reserved
1 Scheduled castes and Scheduled castes converts to Buddhism .. .. 13
2 Scheduled Tribes including those living outside specified areas .. 7
3 Denotified Tribes and Nomadie Tribes .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4
4 Other Back ward Communities .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
10
34
Total .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
(b) The 24 per cent seats reserved for students belonging to the three categories of backward classes : (i) Scheduled castes and Scheduled castes converts to Buddhism (ii) Scheduled Tribes including those living outside specified areas, and (iii) Denotified and Nomadic Tribes, should be exclusive of the number of students belonging to these three categories who secure admission on merit provided that the total number of students of these three categories of backward classes who secured admission against the 24 per cent reserved quota and merit does not exceed 40 per cent of the total number of seats available for admission.
(c) x x x x x
(d) Students belonging to the backward classes mentioned in the uniform list of backward classes for the whole of Maharashtra under Government Resolution, Education and Social Welfare Resolution, Education and Social Welfare Department, No. EBC-2169/J, dated 10th July 1969, as amended from time to time will continue to enjoy the benefit of the 10 per cent reservation of seats for them.
It is clarified for the information of all that 10 per cent is not an overall ceiling for the O. B. C. candidates. It is open to the O. B. C. candidates to secure more than 10 per cent seats on the basis of merit. However, if the admissions they secure on merit are less than 10 per cent there should be reservation for them to the extent of the shortfall below 10 per cent."
The petitioner belongs to one of the Other Backward Communities for which 10 per cent of the total seats have been reserved. He asserts
that if this percentage is not reduced by applying the provision contained in the concluding portion of sub-cl.(d), he stands fairly good chances of being admitted in one of the Medical Colleges in Nagpur. In sum and substance, his contention is that candidates from the Other Backward Communities who are admitted on their own merit should be taken against the quota for the open category without affecting the seats which are reserved for the Backward Communities and the seats which are reserved should be filled in irrespective of the number of candidates who have been admitted on their own merit. In other words, he submits that the admission of candidates belonging to these communities should be in two separate groups, one group consisting of candidates who secure admission on their own merit in the open category and the other group consisting of candidates admitted against the quota reserved for these communities and the former should not be included in the latter. It is urged that the concluding portion of sub-cl.(d) of Cl.A of R.5 impinges on the right of the backward class for which certain percentage of seats are reserved and if candidates belonging to this class can get themselves admitted on their own merit, that would be by virtue of the constitutional right guaranteed to them under Cl.(2) of Art.29 of the Constitution and such seats cannot be off set against the seats which are reserved for such community by virtue of the power exercised by the Governmen
