SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Guj) 13

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :A.P.RAVANI
GHANSHYAM KISAN BORIKAR - Appellant
Versus
L.D.ENGG.COLLEGE AND OTHERS - Respondent
S.C.A. 6903 of 1985
Decided On : 01/21/1986

Advocates Appeared: DIPAK K.TRIVEDI, P.K.PANCHOLI

Headnote:

Constitution of India , 1950 – Article 15 (4), 226 , 341 and 342 - Public Employment Act, 1957 - It requires revolutionary zeal and sincerity of purpose on the part of all those who execute implement and interpret the laws - This is the message of the instant case in which guideline issued by Central Government in relation to implementation of policy of reservation has come up for consideration - Can the guideline be understood and implemented so as to whittle down constitutional provisions relating to Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles - While petitioner was serving at Bombay his daughter got admission in medical course on reserved seats for ST candidates - Petitioner was in course of his service transferred from to sometime in the year - His son named has passed the qualifying examination i. e. XII Std. HSC examination held by the Secondary Education Board - It is also an undisputed fact that the petitioners son has secured 267 marks out of 450 marks - For the purpose of consideration of merits in Medical and Engineering colleges in the State total of 450 marks of Maths (I and II) Physics Biology and Chemistry are being taken into account - Authorities processing the application forms for admission to the B. E. course felt that tribe to which student belongs was not recognised as ST in relation to the State of and therefore he was not entitled to claim seat as ST candidate - Petitioners son being minor the petitioner as father and guardian of the student has challenged the legality and validity of this decision of respondent-authorities and has invoked jurisdiction of this High Court – Held, It is also submitted that in other States students belonging to the State of and belonging to SC/st in relation to the State of are being denied the benefits of SC/st only on the 6 that they have migrated from State of Gujarat and that they do not belong to that particular State - If this is so it is really a sorry state of affairs Instead of following the wrong course adopted by other State authorities State of Gujarat should have taken up issue with Central Government and point clarified - Now it is hoped that the Central Government would immediately take appropriate steps and shall clarify the position in the light of discussion and observations - A student or candidate belong to unreserved category hailing from if otherwise eligible to seek admission in medical technical or professional institution either at graduation level or at the post-graduation level anywhere in country would be in a position to claim such admission on the basis of his merit. Such a student or candidate cannot be denied admission and/or employment in any other part of the country on the ground that he belongs to the State of Gujarat and he does not belong to the State wherein he is seeking admission and/or employment Such a student cannot be told that he shall have to surrender his fundamental right to reside and settle anywhere in country and also his fundamental right of freedom of movement throughout the territory of India - Same logic and the same criteria should apply to the students and/or candidates belonging to SC and ST - They are also citizens of the country - They are also governed by the same law prevailing in the country - Demands are matters of right and not of philanthropy - They ask for parity and not charity - They claim their constitutional right to equality of status and of opportunity and economic and social justice. Several bridges have to be erected so that they may cross the Rubicon simply because constitutional protection is extended to them they cannot be treated differently than the other citizens of the country - They cannot be asked to surrender their fundamental rights if they wish to avail of benefits of constitutional protection extended to them - There is no reason to adopt one standard in respect of the members belonging to SC/st and other weaker sections of the society on the one hand and another standard – Order accordingly.

A. P. RAVANI, J.

( 1 ) SOCIO-ECONOMIC transformation of the society does not take place by mere legislative and/or constitutional enactments. It requires revolutionary zeal and sincerity of purpose on the part of all those who execute implement and interpret the laws. This is the message of the instant case in which the guideline issued by the Central Government in relation to the implementation of policy of reservation has come up for consideration. Can the guideline be understood and implemented so as to whittle down the constitutional provisions relating to Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles? Can such meaning be allowed to operate? These are the questions which are to be examined in the proper perspective and with the awareness of historical and socio-economic background of our society.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is serving as Executive Engineer in the Post and Telegraphs Department of the Union of India. He originally belonged to State of Maharashtra in relation to which his caste/community i. e. Halba has been recognised as Scheduled Tribe (ST ). There is dispute with regard to the fact that Halba caste/community has been recognised as ST in relation to the State of Maharashtra since the year 1956 if not earlier. While the petitioner was serving at Bombay his daughter got admission in medical course on reserved seats for ST candidates. The petitioner was in the course of his service transferred from Bombay to Ahmedabad sometime in the year 1978. His son named Vinaykumar G. Borikar has passed the qualifying examination i. e. XII Std. HSC examination held by the Gujarat Secondary Education Board Gandhinagar. It is also an undisputed fact that the petitioners son has secured 267 marks out of 450 marks. For the purpose of consideration of merits in Medical and Engineering colleges in the State total of 450 marks of Maths (I and II) Physics Biology and Chemistry are being taken into account. The minimum required marks for the students belonging to SC ST and other backward classes are 202 out of 450.

( 3 ) THE petitioners son applied for being admitted to 1st year B. E. course within the prescribed time-limit. His application was also supported by a certificate issued by the appropriate officer i. e. District Backward Class Welfare Officer Ahmedabad-Gandhinagar who certified that Vinay Borikar (the student) of Nagpur (Maharashtra) belongs to Halba tribe which is recognised as ST. The authorities processing the application forms for admission to the B. E. course felt that Halba tribe to which the student belongs was not recognised as ST in relation to the State of Gujarat and therefore he was not entitled to claim the seat as ST candidate. The petitioners son being minor the petitioner as father and guardian of the student has challenged the legality and validity of this decision of the respondent-authorities and has invoked the jurisdiction of this High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

( 4 ) THE respondents-authorities have not disputed the fact that the student belongs to Halba community which is recognised as ST in relation to the State of Maharashtra. The respondent 804 authorities have also not disputed the eligibility of the student concerned. The only ground on which the claim of the student to secure the benefit of reserved seat for ST is denied is that he originally belonged to Maharashtra State and the community to which he belongs i. e. Halba is recognised as ST in relation to the State of Maharashta and not in relation to the State of Gujarat.

( 5 ) IN support of the aforesaid stand the respondent-authorities have relied upon the guideline issued by the Central Government in it letter dared April 2 1975 The relevant part of the guideline which has been relied upon reads as follows:2 Cases of Migration (i) xxx xxx xxx (i) Where a person migrates from one State to another he can claim to belong to a Scheduled caste or a Scheduled Tribe only in relation to the State to which he originally belonge

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top