The court upheld the university's discretion in formulating sports admission policies, affirming the necessity of reasonable classification without arbitrary exclusion under Article 14.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 - Writ of Mandamus - Admission guidelines based on sports quota - Appellants challenged exclusion of Netball for males - Court upheld university's decision citing policy discretion and concluded non-arbitrariness in classification. (Paras 5, 6, 10)

(B) Policy Decisions - Court's reluctance to interfere with policy decisions unless arbitrary - Participants must adhere to guidelines they accepted. (Paras 6, 9)

(C) Reasonable Nexus - Classification must have a fair connection to the object of the policy, affirming the importance of expert discretion in educational admissions. (Paras 6, 10)

Facts of the case:
Appellants, gold medalists in Netball, claimed exclusion from the men's category violated Article 14. Their performance was acknowledged, but the exclusion was deemed a reasonable policy decision.

Findings of Court:
No error found in the Single Judge's decision, maintaining policy integrity and adherence by candidates.

Issues: Whether exclusion of Netball from the men's category for admissions is arbitrary or violates constitutional rights.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that universities have the discretion to form admission policies and classifications, and previous participation in selection processes binds candidates to existing guidelines.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. right to appeal against admission guidelines. (Para 1 , 2)
2. exclusion of netball for male candidates. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's stance on policy decisions. (Para 6 , 7)
4. legal interpretation of admissions clauses. (Para 8)
5. confirmation of lower court's judgment. (Para 9)

JUDGMENT

D.N. Patel, Chief Justice (Oral)

Proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.

CM APPL. 684/2021 (exemption)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application is disposed of.

LPA 10/2021, C.Ms.No. 683/2021 (stay)

1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants (original petitioners) feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 21st December, 2020 in W.P.(C) No.10777/2020.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants (original petitioners) and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, what emerges is that the appellants are in effect seeking amendment/addition to the guidelines for admission process in the Delhi University based on sports quota. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants (original petitioners) has drawn the attention of this Court to the "Bulletin of Information for Admission to Under Graduate Courses (2020-2021)" which is appended as Annexure P/1 (page No. 71).

3. Relevant part of the aforesaid Bulletin with regard to Games or Sports considered for admission on the basis of the sports quota, reads as under:

"B. Games/Sports considered for Admission on the basis of Sports

Team Games

Baseball (M), Basketball (M&W), Cricket (M&W), Football (M&W), Handball (M&W), Hockey (M&W), Kabaddi (M&W), Kho-kho (M&W), Netball (W), Softball (W) and Volleyball (M&W)

Dual & Combat Sports

Badminton (M & W), Boxing (M&W), Judo (M&W), Squash (M&W), Table Tennis (M&W), Taekwando* (M&W), Tennis (M&W) and Wrestling (M&W). *Kyorugi

Individual Sports

Archery** (M&W), Athletics (M&W), Chess (M&W), Diving (M&W), Gymnastics (M&W), Shooting***(M&W), Swimming (M&W) and Weight-lifting (M&W)

**Compound & Recurve

****10 Meter Air Pistol & 10 Meter Air Rifle"

4. As per the aforesaid Guidelines, for admission on the basis of sports quota, various games have been included for reservation of the seats. As an illustration, Baseball is considered for admission on the basis of sports quota for male candidates, Basketball is for both male as well as female candidates. Similarly, Cricket is for both male as well as female candidates and Netball is only for female candidates.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants herein are sportsmen who have secured Gold Medals in Netball game at Sub-Junior Nationals under 16, Junior Nationals under 19 and Senior Nationals in Male Category. The grievance canvassed by counsel for the appellants is that while the guidelines have included Netball as a game for the female candidates, the same is not included for the male category and no plausible explanation is forthcoming for not including Netball under the male category. The classification sought to be made is without a reasonable nexus with the object sought to be achieved and is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is argued that the learned Single Judge has erred in not allowing the prayer in the Writ Petition of issuing a writ of mandamus to respondent No. 1 to include Netball in "Men Section" for admission to the Under Graduate Courses 2020-21 in the Delhi University on the basis of sports quota.

6. We are not in agreement with the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the appellants (original petitioners) for the following reasons:

(i) Annexure P/1 which are the Guidelines for admission on the basis of sports quota (relevant page being 128), is a policy decision of the Delhi University.

(ii) In our view, the learned Single Judge has rightly not exercised his extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the policy decision of the resp