SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Mad) 824

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.P. SAHI, SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, JJ.
All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Represented by C.Ve. Shanmugam, District Secretary, Villupuram – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi & Others – Respondents
W.P. Nos. 8324, 8325, 8326, 8327, 8335, 8361, 8420, 8445, 8452, 8453, 8599, 8630 & 8828 of 2020 & W.M.P. Nos. 10394, 9986, 9987, 9988, 10446, 10178, 9996, 9997, 9989, 9995, 9990, 9994, 10393, 10166, 10167, 10722, 10723, 10042, 10118, 10176, 10119, 10179 & 10177 of 2020
Decided on : 27-07-2020

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :AR.L. Sundaresan, Counsel for M/s. K. Gowtham Kumar, K. Balu, P. Wilson, Senior Counsel for M/s. P. Wilson Associates, A. Thiagarajan, Senior Counsel for M/s. D. Veerasekaran, R. Priya Kumar, Vijay Narayan, Advocate General assisted by V. Jayaprakash Narayanan, Government Pleader, E. Manoharan, Spl. Government Pleader, Richardson Wilson, Stalin Abhimanyu, T. Saikrishnan, K. Balu for M/s. S. Arunachalam, P. Dinesh Kumar, R. Ravanan, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R. Shankaranarayanan, Addl. Solicitor General assisted by Venkatasamy Babu, K.S. Jayaganesan, K. Srinivasa Murthy, V. Chandrasekaran, V.P. Raman for Medical Council of India, Vijay Narayan, Advocate General assisted by V. Jayaprakash Narayanan, N. Mala, Addl. Govt. Pleader (Pondy), Advocates.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 15(4) and (5) - Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1993 - Reservation policy for Other Backward Classes in All India Quota medical seats - The Court addresses the non-implementation of reservation policy for Other Backward Classes in respect of both Under Graduate and Post Graduate medical courses administered by State-run medical colleges - Courts have to enforce the constitutional provisions and ensure equal opportunities in education without discrimination. (Paras 3, 100, 106)

(B) Mandamus - Writ jurisdiction - Writ Court holds that the Director General of Health Services must enforce State-specific reservation policies, resulting in a need for inter-departmental collaboration to operationalize such reservations against All India Quota seats. (Paras 104, 106)

(C) Legality of Differing Reservation Percentages - Issue raised regarding the arbitrary application of differently expressed reservation standards between State and Central Government institutions; needful of judicial direction to balance social justice with educational efficiency. (Paras 24, 100, 104, 106)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, including political parties and the State Government, argued against the central authorities' failure to implement the stipulated reservation of 69% for Other Backward Classes in Tamil Nadu against All India Quota seats, despite the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Act of 1993.

Findings of Court:
The High Court found that the Court's directive was necessary for implementing the State's existing laws regarding reservations in coordination with the Central Government and relevant authorities.

Issues: Central issue revolves around the implementation of existing State law on reservations in the context of All India Quota medical admissions.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court recognized the constitutional validity of reservations while stressing the importance of timely implementation and avoiding discrepancies in educational opportunities.

Result: The matter was referred for a collaborative effort to enforce reservations for Other Backward Classes against All India Quota seats.

Table of Content
1. reservations for obc in medical admissions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. legal basis for obc reservation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. arguments supporting obc reservation. (Para 6 , 8 , 9)
4. petitioners' specific claims and arguments. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. judicial observations on reservation implementation. (Para 23 , 24 , 26)

ORDER :

1. This legal battle has been brought forth practically by all the major political parties of the State and a couple of individual candidates seeking admission regarding reservations for the Other Backward Classes in the All India Quota seats contributed/surrendered by the State relating to Under Graduate and Post Graduate medical courses in the State Government/Union Territory and the Aided Medical Colleges, the admissions whereto are regulated by the Medical Council of India and the Dental Council of India. The concern has been expressed by political forums and this is a unique litigation where the State Government in power in Tamil Nadu has also joined hands on an equal footing with the other petitioners to press forward the implementation of such reservation.

2. All the thirteen writ petitions before us broadly raise one issue, namely, that of non implementation of the policy and percentage of reservation for Other Backward Classes in the State of Tamil Nadu and the Union Territory of Puducherry, to the extent as provided for – 69% (50% for Other Backward Categories and 19% for the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Categories in the State of Tamil Nadu), and 50% (34% for Other Backward Categories and 16% for the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Categories in the Union Territory of Puducherry) to such of the seats in the Under Graduate as well as Post Graduate Courses of recognized State run Medical Institutions within the above territories, contributed towards the All India Quota pool by the State, namely 50% of the seats in the Under Graduate courses and 15% seats of the Post Graduate Courses run in these institutions, including Dental Education Courses.

3. The challenge is based on the ground that such reservation has constitutional backing and is protected under Article 15(4) and (5) of the Constitution of India read with the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions and of Appointments or Posts in the Services under the State) Act, 1993 and the amended Medical Council of India Regulations for Graduate Medical Education as well as for Post Graduate Medical Education.

4. It is the contention of all the petitioners that reservation of seats in medical colleges for respective categories has to be provided as per applicable laws prevailing in States/Union Territories, nonetheless, in spite of these provisions being in place, and the proposal by the Union Government itself as disclosed in the short counter-affidavit filed by them, both in these proceedings as well as a similar affidavit filed in W.P.(C) No.596 of 2015 pending before the Supreme Court of India in the matter of Dr.Saloni Kumari and another v. Director General, Health Services and others , which is incidentally sworn by the same Officer, no steps have been taken to extend this benefit of reservation against All India Quota seats contributed/surrendered by the State in spite of having specifically provided for and, therefore, a mandamus has been prayed for seeking implementation of reservation in favour of the Other Backward Categories to the aforesaid class of All India Quota seats available in the State run medical colleges and also apply the same percentage of State specific reservation in the institutions run and managed by the Central Government.

5. It is contended that, by not doing so, the respondents, namely, Union of India and the Medical Council of India, as well as the Counselling Agency, are acting arbitrarily by not enforcing the provisions of law for

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top