IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
Deepali Dutta, D/o Sh. Pardeep Kumar Dutta - Petitioners
Vs.
The University of Jammu through its Registrar, Baba Saheb Ambedkar Marg, Jammu - Respondent
WP(C) No.605 of 2024
Decided On : 03-05-2024
Reservation - University Recruitment - Kashmir and Jammu Universities Act, 1969 - 1969 Act - J&K Reservation Act, 2004 - UGC Regulations, 2010 - EWS - SC - ST - OBC - Reservation in Universities
Fact of the Case:
An advertisement was issued for a faculty position at Jammu University under the EWS category. The petitioner, also an EWS category member, challenged the selection of another candidate, respondent No.4, who was provisionally selected for the post under EWS category. The petitioner claimed that respondent No.4 did not possess a valid EWS category certificate under the Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Act, 2004, and was ineligible for the post. The court was tasked with determining the eligibility of respondent No.4 and the obligation of the University in providing reservation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the University of Jammu is not obligated to provide reservation for EWS category in the absence of specific guidelines or directions from the UGC or the Central Government. The advertisement for the post under EWS category was held to be without jurisdiction and authority, and the selection process was quashed. The University was directed to issue a fresh advertisement and, if desired, to provide reservation for EWS category by amending its statutes in accordance with the law and UGC regulations.
Issues: The key issues were whether the University of Jammu is obligated to provide reservation in teaching faculty positions under the J&K Reservation Act, 2004, and UGC Regulations, 2010, and whether respondent No.4 was eligible for the post under the EWS category.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the University of Jammu is not obligated to provide reservation for EWS category in the absence of specific guidelines or directions from the UGC or the Central Government. It further concluded that the advertisement for the post under EWS category was without jurisdiction and authority, and the selection process was quashed. The University was directed to issue a fresh advertisement and, if desired, to provide reservation for EWS category by amending its statutes in accordance with the law and UGC regulations.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of, quashing the selection process for the post of Assistant Professor Sociology under EWS category and directing the University to issue a fresh advertisement. The University was also directed to provide reservation for EWS category, if desired, by amending its statutes in accordance with the law and UGC regulations.
JUDGMENT :
1. An Advertisement Notification bearing No.Adm/TW/C&R/23/311 dated 09.06.2023 was issued by the Registrar of Jammu University inviting applications, complete in all respects, for making recruitment to various faculty positions. The Advertisement Notification included one post of Assistant Professor Sociology earmarked for reserved category of Economical Weaker Section (EWS). The petitioner, claiming to be a member of EWS category, also applied for the said post. Amongst other applicants for the post, respondent No.4 had also sought consideration under EWS category.
2. The process of selection, conducted by the University, culminated into issuance of the Provisional Select List by the Registrar vide his No. Adm/TW/C&R/24/1743 dated 29th January, 2024. Respondent No.4 was shown as provisionally selected for the post in question under EWS category. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court through the medium of instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to throw challenge to the selection of respondent No.4. Selection of respondent No.4 is challenged, inter alia, on the following grounds:-
(ii) Because respondent No.4 being a candidate belonging to the category of resident of an area adjoining to the international border (educationally backward class) is otherwise ineligible to obtain ‘EWS’ category certificate under the provisions of Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Act and the Rules framed thereunder.
3. Having regard to the fact that pure questions of law are involved for determination and that there is no dispute on facts, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 has chosen not to file written objections. The University has filed its reply affidavit and has explained the manner in which it has carried out reservations in respect of recruitment to various faculty positions in the University.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, following questions arise for determination in this case:-
(ii) Whether University of Jammu, a UGC recognized University and being bound by UGC Regulations (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education), Regulations 2010 [“2010 Regulations”], shall, in the matter of recruitment to Teaching Faculties (teachers and other academic staff), be governed by the Rules and Norms of reservation prescribed by the Government of India or by the provision for reservations made by the State or Union Territory within whose territorial jurisdiction it is situated.
(iii) Whether respondent No.4, who possesses a valid ‘EWS’ category certificate issued by the competent authority under the reservation norms of the Government of India but is ineligible to obtain similar certificate under the J&K Reservation Act, 2004 and the Rules framed thereunder, was eligible and entitled to be considered for the post of Assistan
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the University of Jammu is not obligated to provide reservation for EWS category in the absence of specific guidelines or directions from the ....
The court established that the application of reservation in recruitment must adhere to prescribed procedures set by the State Government, and any deviation from this framework renders the recruitmen....
The court established that while UGC guidelines mandate department-wise reservation, the existing state rules are not unconstitutional and do not require amendment based solely on the petitioners' cl....
(1) Reports and recommendations made by Parliamentary Committees/Commissions that precede enactment of a Statute can be used as external aids to interpret meaning of ambiguous words in a statutory pr....
Point of Law : Procedure to be followed while effecting horizontal reservations, which we are bound to follow in terms of Article 141 of the Constitution.
Important Point – Appointment – Age bar – University is bound to comply with what is declared in its advertisement – In order to obviate injustice caused to candidate, university may consider creatin....
Point of law: The proper and correct course is to first fill up the OC quota (50%) on the basis of merit; then fill up each of the social reservation quotas i.e. SC, ST and BC; the third step would b....
The court ruled that educational institutions may choose not to provide reservations, and courts cannot mandate such provisions, as policy decisions lie exclusively within the state's discretion.
Participation in selection process estops merit-based non-selection challenge absent proven illegality or arbitrariness.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.