The main legal point established is that interchangeability of SC and ST seats is permissible under Rule-2.6 of the JNV Selection Test-2021, subject to a maximum of 50% for both categories.

JUDGMENT

SASHIKANTA MISHRA,J. - The petitioner being a student of Class-V of Sri Aurobindo Integral Education Center, Laxmidharpur, Dhenkanal had applied for admission to Class-VI in Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya (JNV) in the academic session 2021-22. She appeared in the entrance examination conducted pursuant to advertisement issued by Government of India. The petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Tribe (ST) Khaira community. She qualified for admission in the said entrance examination and was declared to have passed in "Rural SC Category". When it was found that she actually belongs to ST category, she was refused admission in JNV. It is stated that the category of the petitioner was wrongly mentioned as 'SC' instead of 'ST' at the time of filling up of the online application. It is further stated that such error was caused because of mistake committed by the Data Entry Operator (DEO). Since the Rules governing the admission to JNVs permits interchangeability of SC and ST candidates, the petitioner contends that she should not have been denied admission. During pendency of the writ application, the academic session 2021-22 having expired, the petitioner amended the writ petition with prayer to direct the authorities to allow her to take admission in Class-VII by treating her admission into Class-VI notionally.

2. A preliminary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the JNV, Saranga. It is stated that there is no vacancy in ST category and that interchangeability is not possible as all ST seats have been filled up. If the petitioner is allowed against SC category, the eligible SC candidates in the available panel will be deprived of their legitimate rights.

3. A further affidavit was filed by the JNV stating that as per the Para-b of the NVS Prospectus, reservation of seats in favour of children belonging to the SC and ST is provided in proportion to their population in the district concerned provided that in no district, such reservation will be less than the national average (15% for SC and 7.5 % for ST) but subject to maximum of 50% for both the categories (SC & ST) taken together. It is further stated that these reservations are interchangeable and over and above the candidates selected under open merit. It is also stated that admission process for JNV Selection Test-2021 has been exhausted upon issue of notification of JNV Selection Test2022-23.

4. In course of hearing, an additional affidavit has been filed by JNV reiterating the stand taken in the earlier affidavits. It is stated that the petitioner being selected in SC category, failed to produce the relevant caste certificate and was therefore, rightly denied admission. Presently, no seat is available under ST quota and the petitioner having been selected under the SC category, cannot be adjusted against the SC seat in view of the fact that she belongs to the ST category. It is further stated that out of 80 seats, 79 candidates have already been admitted and promoted to Class-VII w.e.f. 1/5/2022 and one seat is lying vacant because of interim order passed by this Court in the present writ application. On such ground, the claim of the petitioner has been refuted as being without any merit.

5. Counter affidavit has been filed by Sri Aurobindo Integral Education Center (opposite party no.4). It is specifically stated that while studying in the School, the petitioner had submitted her application to take admission in JNV in the district of Dhenkanal through the said School. The Computer Assistant of the School filled up her online application in a DTP Center, where the mistake crept into the record and by mistake the caste of the petitioner was written as 'SC' instead of 'ST' which could not be detected at the relevant time. After coming to know of the mistake, the Principal of the School attempted to convince the Principal of the JNV, Saranga in his letter dtd. 4/10/2021.

6. Heard Mr. S. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned DSGI with Mr.