1971 Supreme(HP) 60

Himachal Pradesh High Court
M. H. BEG,CHET RAM THAKUR
Manju - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Decided On : 09/10/1971

The Court held that the Government's decision to exclude the petitioners from admission on the ground that they were not children of Himachal Government employees was erroneous and violated the principles of natural justice. The Court also held that the Government's attempt to amend the definition of a bona fide Himachali, which sought to impose additional restrictive criteria, was unconstitutional and invalid.

Headnote:

The judgment deals with the validity of the rules and procedures followed by the Himachal Pradesh Government and the Selection Board for admitting students to the Medical College, Simla, and the eligibility criteria for admission, particularly for children of Himachal Pradesh Government employees. The petitioners, Kumari Manju Baweja and Rajesh Kumar Abbey, challenged the denial of admission to the Medical College despite meeting the prescribed conditions, alleging arbitrary and discriminatory practices.

Fact of the Case:

1. Kumari Manju Baweja claimed to be a permanent resident of Himachal Pradesh and the daughter of an employee of the H.P. Government. Her application was accompanied by a certificate of Executive Engineer, Mandi Division, Head of the P.W.D. Office in which her father worked. However, upon further inquiries, the Government doubted the authenticity of the certificate and sought clarification from the Accountant General, Himachal and Chandigarh, who confirmed that her father was a Himachal Government employee. Despite this, her admission was denied. 2. Rajesh Kumar Abbey also claimed to be the son of a Himachal Pradesh Government employee and submitted a certificate from the Executive Engineer, Bilaspur Division No.1, H.P.P.W.D. However, the Government sought clarification from the Accountant General, who opined that Abbey's father was not on a Himachal cadre and was, therefore, not a State employee. Abbey's alternative claim as a permanent resident of Himachal Pradesh was also rejected.

Finding of the Court:

1. The Court held that the rules and procedures followed by the Government and the Selection Board were binding on both parties and had to be adhered to. 2. The Court found that the petitioners had met the eligibility criteria as children of Himachal Pradesh Government employees, as evidenced by the certificates submitted and the subsequent confirmation from the Accountant General. 3. The Court held that the Government's decision to exclude the petitioners from admission on the ground that they were not children of Himachal Government employees was erroneous and violated the principles of natural justice. 4. The Court also held that the Government's attempt to amend the definition of a bona fide Himachali, which sought to impose additional restrictive criteria, was unconstitutional and invalid. 5. The Court further held that the reservation of seats for permanent residents of Himachal Pradesh was justified, as it was a reasonable classification based on the State's responsibility towards its inhabitants and the need to provide medical education to the best talent available.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners met the eligibility criteria for admission to the Medical College, Simla, as children of Himachal Pradesh Government employees. 2. Whether the Government's decision to exclude the petitioners from admission on the ground that they were not children of Himachal Government employees was valid. 3. Whether the Government's attempt to amend the definition of a bona fide Himachali, which sought to impose additional restrictive criteria, was constitutional. 4. Whether the reservation of seats for permanent residents of Himachal Pradesh was justified.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the petitioners had met the eligibility criteria as children of Himachal Pradesh Government employees, as evidenced by the certificates submitted and the subsequent confirmation from the Accountant General. 2. The Court held that the Government's decision to exclude the petitioners from admission on the ground that they were not children of Himachal Government employees was erroneous and violated the principles of natural justice. 3. The Court also held that the Government's attempt to amend the definition of a bona fide Himachali, which sought to impose additional restrictive criteria, was unconstitutional and invalid. 4. The Court further held that the reservation of seats for permanent residents of Himachal Pradesh was justified, as it was a reasonable classification based on the State's responsibility towards its inhabitants and the need to provide medical education to the best talent available.

Final Decision: The Court allowed the petitions and directed the Principal and the Selection Board of the College to consider the cases of the petitioners on merits and to admit them to the College if they would have been entitled to admission based on their merits compared to other candidates who had sought admission in competition with them last year.