The State Government is competent to incorporate and enforce a reservation in terms of Article 15 (4) of the Constitution. The decision taken by the State Government on 4-5-1999 to enhance the reservation is not challenged.

Bhagwati Prasad, J.-A controversy was raised by a letter petition sent by a large number of students who had taken up the examination for Pre-Medical Test and Pre-Veterinary Test, 1999 (referred to hereinafter as ‘P.M.T.’ and ‘P.V.T.’ respectively) held from 9th to 12th June, 1999 at different examination centres in different cities of the State of Rajasthan.

2. By this letter petition the petitioners sought to challenge the enhanced reservation provided for by the Government of Rajasthan in a cabinet Meeting held on 4-5-1999 whereby the quota of Scheduled castes was enhanced from 8% to 16% and quota of Scheduled Tribes was enhanced from 6% to 12%. Apart from these two reservations 3 new reservations was provided for by the State Government for the candidates belonging to Other Backward classes (referred to hereinafter as ‘O.B.C.’) and this was 21% of the seats. As alleged this letter petition was sent to this court by students after getting purturbed and aggrieved by the newspaper reports.

3. It wassubmitted in the letter petition that after submission of the application forms to appear in the PMT/PVT examination 1999, it was unjust and improper to change the conditions of reservations, before and during the preparation by the students for the test. It was also averred in the letter petition that certificate regarding Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes was required to be signed by the District Magistrate but the certificate regarding OB was not prescribed to be issued by the District Magistrate.

4. The students have given out in the letter petition that they were preparing for the examination relying upon the reservation quota prescribed in the Information Booklet distributed along with the forms. It has been expressed by the students that they were disturbed and shocked to find that due to enhanced reservation, their chances for success have been diminished and this has been done after submission of their admission forms. The students were surprised to read the news items and that they are constrained to think that they should not have wasted time and money when new reservation policy has come into being.

5. It wasfurther averred in the letter petition that many students belonging to Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes and OBC were deprived of the advantage of the enhanced reservation quota because they had no notice of more chances being available at the time when the forms were filled in. The petitioners have alleged that the action of the State Government was vitiated because it was taken in the back-ground of Lok Sabha elections which were going to be held in September, 1999 to take advantage of the votes of these communities. The effect of this enhancement has resulted into distraction of minds and preparation and studies of these students and virtually paralised their preparation for the examinations.

6. Notices were issued to the respondents and a reply was filed on behalf of the State Government wherein an objection was taken by the State Government that the petition pertains to challenge a policy decision of the Government. Such petition does not involve any public interest and is filed to further the personal interests and, therefore, the matter is cognizable by a Single Bench of this Court. In its reply the State Government contended that the Information Booklets supplied to the petitioners does not mean that the Government was debarred from enhancing the quota of reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and O.B.C. So long as the reservation made is consistent with the constitutional mandate contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, the reservation cannot be said to be arbitrary and, thus, the reservation does not violate any constitutional mandate. The reservation has been kept below 50% and, therefore, is not liable to be impeached.

7. It has been claimed that the State Government is fully empowered to make reservation in favour of socially and economically backward co