Back
2008 Supreme(P&H) 1832
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Hemant Gupta and Nawab Singh JJ.
Devanshi Sharma
Versus
Panjab University
Civil Writ Petition No. 14596 of 2008,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 3, 2008
The importance of excellence in sports as the guiding principle for admission to seats meant for sports persons.
Headnote:
Admission - Sports Quota - UBS Prospectus - [MBA Admission] - [CAT Section 3, 8, 11] - The court discussed the interpretation of the UBS Prospectus and the guidelines for admission to the reserved category of sports, emphasizing the importance of excellence in sports as the guiding principle for admission to seats meant for sports persons. The court highlighted the requirement for candidates to be eligible and graded based on their achievements in sports, and concluded that the admission process did not suffer from any patent illegality or material irregularity.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought admission to MBA in the University Business School under the sports quota. The petitioner alleged that the admission granted to other candidates under the sports quota was in violation of the conditions published in the prospectus.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that only 55 candidates were eligible for admission as sports persons, and the action of the respondent-University in the admission process did not suffer from any patent illegality or material irregularity.
Issues: Interpretation of the UBS Prospectus and guidelines for admission to the reserved category of sports, and the validity of the admission process under the sports quota.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of excellence in sports as the guiding principle for admission to seats meant for sports persons, and highlighted the requirement for candidates to be eligible and graded based on their achievements in sports.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, finding that the admission process did not suffer from any patent illegality or material irregularity.
Hemant Gupta, J.
1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court claiming admission to Masters of Business Administration (MBA) in the University Business School, Panjab University, Chandigarh, against the seat meant forsports quota.
2. The petitioner graduated from Goswami Ganesh Dutt Sanatan Dharam College, Sector 32, Chandigarh, with 79% marks in the academic year 2007-08. The petitioner is a player of Korfball game and participated in Inter University Tournament as well as at State Level. The petitioner applied for admission in MBA Course at University Business School, Panjab University, Chandigarh, and also claimed seat under the sports category The petitioner appeared in the Entrance Test held on 18.11.2007 and obtained 71.25 percentile score \n the written examination.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that in terms of the conditions in the prospectus, the number of candidates to be called for Group Discussion and Personal Interview are contemplated to be equal to eight times of the number of seats in all the courses in each category. It was, thus, alleged that the total number of seats are 90 and, therefore, 720 candidates of general category would be called for Group Discussion and Personal Interview. Similar number of candidates were to be called in respect of other categories.
4. It is contended by the petitioner that total 8 seats were required to be filled up from amongst sports persons in view of 5% reservation based upon achievement in sports as per prospectus and, therefore, eight times i.e. 64 candidates were required to be called for Group Discussion and Personal Interview. However, the respondent-University has proceeded ahead in calling all the sports persons for Group Discussion and Personal Interview and on the basis of such Group Discussion and Personal Interview from amongst all the candidates who have applied against sports quota, merit list has been prepared. It has been, thus, alleged that calling of all the candidates who applied for seats against sports quota is in violation of the conditions published in the prospectus and, thus, admission granted to respondents No. 5 to 11 is in contravention of the conditions published in the prospectus.
5. On behalf of the respondent-University, it has been pointed out that the admission in the sports category in the University Business School have been made on the basis of legal opinion dated 12.08.2008 of the University Legal Retainer. The relevant extract from the said opinion reads as under:-
".......A strict application or enforcement of Clause-1 (as also Clause 2) of the UBS Prospectus at page 15 would completely defeat the very object and purpose of sports reservation and invalidate any claim to the rationality of sports category as a separate class. The Abhinav Bindras of the sports world must be given pride of place/priority in the sports quota over those who may have better academic merit but are far poorer sportspersons, or else the sports quota or category must be abolished as a separate class in the system of admissions. To make the metaphor more technically precise, Olympians or international players in Category A must naturally and inevitably stand above national players in Category B. Quite obviously, Category A must stand above category C as well (and so on and forth). To allow a category C candidate to get a seat in the sports category as against a category A candidate, by a strict application of Clause 1 at page 15 of the UBS Prospectus, will reduce the very concept of reservation of sports to a mockery. The candidate at the top of the sports category after final sports gradation by the Directorate of Sports viz., Shalini is placed in the A-3 Grade i.e., "a person representing India in the Olympic Games/World Cup tournaments/Commonwealth Games/Afro Asian Games/Asian Games/ Asian Championships/World University Games (FlSU)/Davis Cup/Grand Slam/SAF Games". She has a CAT score of only 1.33% [far, far below the 64th
