IMPORTANT POINT
Legitimate expectation does not confer a legal right and can only be invoked if the decision is found to be arbitrary, unreasonable, or in gross abuse of power.

ORDER :

1. These two writ petitions, brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, involve common question of law and facts, hence, with the consent of the counsel for the parties, arguments are heard together and both these matters are decided by this common order. For convenience, the facts as well as the prayer of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7869/2023 is taken into consideration.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

“1. To quash and set aside the impugned order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the Respondent (Annexure No.P/1).

2. To restrain the respondents from interfering with the 50% quota of the Petitioner federation for admitting students in its member colleges.”

RIVAL SUBMISSIONS:

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court on several Occasions, a practice is being followed by the State permitting the College Federation for granting admission on 50% seats of different discipline e.g. General Nursing & Midwifery (GNM), Bachelors of Science in Nursing, Post Bachelors of Science in Nursing and Masters of Science in Nursing. Counsel submits that an order in this regard was issued by the respondents way back in the year 2004 i.e. on 04.09.2004, by which an arrangement was made to fill 50% seats by the State and 50% seats by the Federation. Counsel submits that the aforesaid practice was followed by the State for more than a decade and all of a sudden in the year 2022, an order was passed by the State on 06.12.2022 by which the 50% quota of the Federation was reduced to 25%. Counsel submits that the aforesaid action of the State-respondents was assailed by the Colleges Federation.

4. By way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19083/2022 [Rajasthan Private Nursing Schools and Colleges Federation Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.] the petitioner assailed the action of the State and the said petition was allowed along with other batch of writ petitions by this Court vide order dated 02.02.2023 and the order dated 06.12.2022 was quashed and set aside and the respondents were granted liberty to pass fresh orders in accordance with law.

5. Counsel submits that misinterpreting the aforesaid order passed by this Court in the case of Rajasthan Private Nursing Schools and Colleges Federation (supra), a fresh impugned order has been passed by the State on 15.02.2023 by which 50% quota reserved for the Federation has been snatched and now a decision has been taken by the State to grant admission to each and every student by the State only.

6. Counsel submits that the aforesaid action of the State is arbitrary, illegal and the same has been passed in utter violation of principles of natural justice as no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner Federation before passing the impugned order. Counsel submits that the petitioner Federation has got vested right to get 50% quota for giving admission to the students in the above disciplines. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the following judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of one Islamic Academy of Education and Another Vs. State of Karnataka and others reported in (2003) 6 SCC 697 and P.A. Inamdar and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2005) 6 SCC 537. Counsel submits that past practice indicates that the State was not in a position to fill even the 50% quota kept by the State for giving admission to the students. Hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted and the impugned order dated 15.02.2023 be quashed and set aside.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State-respondents opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner Federation has got no right to assail the action of the respondents. Counsel submits that the past practices adopted by the petitioner Federation indicates that they used to retain the mark-sheets of