Back
B.SUBHASHAN REDDY, V.S.SIRPURKAR, R.JAYASIMHA BABU, P.D.DINAKARAN, C.NAGAPPAN
M. Aarthi (Minor) And Others – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Tamil Nadu And Others – Respondent
Key Points: - The court held that the allocation of 12 seats for children born of inter-caste marriage is unconstitutional and directed redistribution among OC, BC, MBC/Denotified Communities, SC/ST in specified ratios (!) (!) (!) . - The judgment discusses whether the special category is traceable to Article 15(4) or Article 15(1) and concludes it is traceable to Article 15(4) (socially and educationally backward classes) and that Tamil Nadu Act 45 of 1994 exhausted the executive power once such reservation was enacted (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The Court affirms the validity of the special category for the academic year 2002-03, citing prior binding decisions (Hari Ganesh, Sona Rajan) but ultimately finds the 12-seat provision unconstitutional and remits to distribution (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The majority emphasizes that inter-caste marriage as a policy supports social equality but must be reconciled with constitutional provisions and prior exhaustive legislative action; it notes the State cannot rely on Article 162 when power is exhausted by legislation (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The interim stay and urgency considerations are acknowledged; admissions for the current year proceeded under binding prior decisions but the 12-seat special category is set aside in terms of allocation for that year (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The judgment lists 15 special categories and confirms the total 71 seats reserved across categories; however, only the inter-caste marriage category is directly addressed in terms of validity for 2002-03 (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The court upholds the general framework of reservation under Article 15(4) and Article 16(4) while cautioning about creating further special categories beyond those already enacted (!) (!) (!) .
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE:
This Writ Appeal and Writ Petitions raise an important question relating to the entitlement of separate reservation for the children of inter-caste marriage under special category other than the reserved categories.
2. W.A. No.3221 of 2002 arises out of the judgment rendered on 3.9.2002 in W.P. No.33838 of 2002. Because of the stay granted by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P. No.23616 of 2002, no relief could be granted by the learned single Judge and as such, the writ appeal has been filed.
3. Ms. P. Sakthipriya, a minor represented by her father and natural guardian Pechimuthu, has filed W.P. Nos.23615 and 23616 of 2002.
(a) In W.P. No.23615 of 2002, the prayer is to declare that Item 10 of clause 4.4. of the Prospectus for Admission into B.E./B.Tech/B.Arch course is to be interpreted as meaning equal opportunity for the various categories mentioned therein and preference to be given when marks are equal on the basis of merit consequent to such direction, direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's case based on such interpretation and issue such further or other orders or directions as this Court may deem fit.
(b) In W.P. No.236
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
