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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1164

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, JJ.
Preethika. C (Minor) - Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Principal Secretary to Government, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P. Nos. 20083, 16884, 18282, 18320, 18718, 20078, 20082, 20084, 20087, 20089, 20092, & 5511 of 2021 (batch cases) & W.M.P. Nos. 24796, 24800, 24802, 24803, 24806 of 2020, 2171, 2172, 2175, 2174, 3202, 3204, 3205, 3206 and 4874 of 2021
Decided On : 07-04-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sriram Panchu, B.N. Suchindran, Xavier Arulraj, Senior Counsel, Father Xavier Associates, Advocates. For the Respondents:R. Shunmugasundaram, Advocate General, P. Muthukumar, State Government Pleader, A.G. Shakeenaa, B. Thiyagarajan, Kapil Sabil, Senior Advocate, A.G. Shakeenaa, Anusha Nagarajan, Amit Anand Tiwari, P. Wilson, Senior Counsel, D. Ravichander, State Government Pleader Additional Advocate General, Devyani Gupta, Advocates.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14, Article 15(4) and Article 15(5) - Tamil Nadu Admission to Undergraduate Courses in Medicine, Dentistry, Indian Medicine and Homeopathy on preferential basis to students of Government Schools Act, 2020 - Constitutional validity challenged on grounds of discrimination and excess reservation beyond 50% - Act provides 7.5% reservation for students of Government schools based on findings of cognitive and socio-economic gaps faced by them as opposed to students from private schools - Court declared Act valid, emphasizing the State's duty for affirmative action to bridge educational disparities. (Paras 10.1, 10.4, and 10.12)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, students from non-Government schools, challenged the Tamil Nadu Act providing preferential admission to Government school students, alleging it violates their right to equality and creates excessive reservation. The State defended the Act citing socio-economic studies showing Government school students as socially disadvantaged. (Para 1)

Findings of Court:
Legislative intent upheld as the impugned Act aims to equalize educational opportunities delineated by socio-economic disparities, qualifying Government school students as socially and educationally backward under relevant articles. (Paragraphs 10.10 to 10.12)

Issues: Whether the Act infringes Article 14 and Article 15 of the Constitution; whether the categorization of students as backward is justified; whether the 7.5% reservation is excessive. (Paragraphs 6.1 and 11.1)

Ratio Decidendi: Classification based on socio-economic factors is rational for addressing the cognitive gap. Legislative competence was affirmed as State powers align with provisions recognizing the necessity for special provisions in educational contexts as justified under Article 15(4). (Paragraphs 10.4 to 10.10)

Result: Writ Petitions dismissed, the Act upheld as constitutionally valid with a review directive in five years to reassess necessity and effectiveness of the reservation. (Paragraphs 10.9 and 12)

Table of Content
1. introduction of petitions regarding admission policies (Para 1)

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Declaration or any Writ, order or Direction of the same nature holding that the Tamil Nadu Admission to undergraduate courses in Medicine, Dentistry, Indian Medicine and Homeopathy on preferential basis to students of Government School Act, 2020 (Act No.34 of 2020) passed by the second respondent, is wholly unconstitutional and void ab initio. And batch etc.,

Common Order

D. Bharatha Chakravarhy, J.

1. The Prayers:

All these Writ Petitions relating to admission to Undergraduate Medical Courses, are taken up together and are disposed off by a common judgment as they are similar and connected to each other. The prayers in these Writ Petitions are in essence the following:

(i) to declare G.O.Ms.No.438, dated 29.10.2020 issued by the first respondent as wholly unconstitutional and Void Ab Initio, which provided for 7.5% preference/reservation to the students of Government schools in admission to undergraduate medical/dental courses;

(ii) to declare that The Tamil Nadu Admission to Undergraduate Courses in Medicine, Dentistry, Indian Medicine and Homeopathy on preferential basis to students of Government Schools Act , 2020 (Act 34 of 2020) passed by the second respondent as wholly unconstitutional and Void Ab Initio which provided for 7.5% preference/reservation to the students of Government schools in admission to undergraduate medical/dental courses;

(iii) to declare Section 2(c), 2(d) and 3 of The Tamil Nadu Admission to Undergraduate Courses in Medicine, Dentistry, Indian Medicine and Homeopathy on preferential basis to students of Government Schools Act , 2020 (Act 34 of 2020) insofar as it excluded the students of the Government Aided Schools in Tamil Nadu for providing preference on par with the students of Government Schools in Tamil Nadu.

1.2. From the pleadings of the parties, more particularly the paragraph Nos.5 to 9 of the counter affidavit, it is clear that the above mentioned G.O.Ms.No.438 in the relief (i) mentioned above, dated 29.10.2020 was issued in exercise of the executive powers of the state government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India, when the bill in respect of the impunged enactment mentioned in the relief (ii) above was passed but was pending for assent of the Governor. To meet the urgent needs of making admission for the Academic Year 2020-2021, pending assent of the Governor for the Act, the said Government Order came to be issued. However, within two days of the issue of the aforesaid G.O, the Act received the assent on 31.10.2020 and upon the Act coming into force, the Government order stood superseded/nullified. Therefore, the prayer (i) referred above has become infructuous and therefore, the matter is considered in respect of the reliefs (ii) and (iii) above. We will first proceed to deal with the relief (ii) above and the prayer (iii) will be dealt with in the later part of this judgment.

A. Challenge to the 7.5% Reservation:

2. The case of the petitioners:

2.1. The petitioners in these Writ Petitions are students who have completed 12th standard and are preparing for/or appeared in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET for short), which is the common admission test prescribed under Section 14 of the National Medical Commission Act , 2019 (NMC Act for short) in respect of M.B.B.S., B.D.S., and other undergraduate courses in all the approved/recognised medical/dental and other colleges/institutes in India.

2.2. At present, as per the scheme of the NMC Act, 15% of the seats are filled up under All India Quota by the Central Government through the Common Merit List prepared applying the policies of reservation of the Central Government and the balance of 85% of the seats fall to the State Government quota, by preparing a merit list by following reservation policies of t






































































































































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