Abdul Raqib Wani vs State and Others

Nisar Ahmad Kakru, J.—Petitioner stands selected by respondent No. 2, the J&K Board of Professional Entrance Examinations (for short

Board) for B.V.Sc. course in the open merit category. In the merit list published by the Board vide notification No. 08 of 2003 dated 22-07-

2003, he is placed at S.No. 124 whereas respondents 6 to 9 figure at S. Nos. 125, 126, 129 & 130 respectively. All the aforementioned

selectee- respondents have been admitted to B.V.Sc. course in the open merit category against free seats in Sheri Kashmir University of

Agricultural Sciences and Technology (for short SKUAST) Jammu, whereas petitioner stands admitted against a payment seat in SKUAST

Kashmir notwithstanding the fact that merit-wise he had better position. To justify the action, it is contented by SKUAST that in the counseling, the

petitioner had given preference to SKUAST Kashmir, therefore, disentitled to admission against free seats. The contention needs to be

appreciated in the light of conditions relevant to the issue stipulated in the brochure, extracted hereunder:

(J) Merit List: The list of candidates, who appear in the Entrance Test drawn up in the descending order of inter se merit.

Note:

The candidate must mention his/her option for courses/college(s) in order of preference in the application form. The candidates will be first

considered for selection against the available seats in Government Colleges and against all the free seats in the Private Colleges. Only such

candidates will be considered, in order of merit, against the payments available in the private colleges as do not fall within the merit of free seats in

Government and Private Colleges. Allocation of Colleges/Branches will be done by counseling after the publication of results.

(Emphasis supplied)

A combined reading of the conditions stipulated in the brochure admit no ambiguity to the effect that the candidates have to be grouped together

for selection against all the free seats in the descending order of inter se merit, obviously it is obligatory upon the respondents to offer free seats to

the candidates having, comparatively, superior merit. Admitted position is that petitioner has higher merit to his credit yet he has been deprived of

the free seat on the pretext of preference which is quiet contrary to the criteria reproduced hereinabove. It may not be inapt to mention that

preference relied upon by the respondents is also not well founded as disclosed by the record. In this view of the matter, the last selectee has to

vacate the free seat for the petitioner but there is respite for him traceable to the stand of the respondent No. 2 evidencing the fact that a free seat

is available at SKUAST Kashmir to which effect a statement was made by him before the court on 17-03-2005. Yet another circumstance to be

taken note of is that as per pleadings, two candidates selected against free seats in SKUAST Kashmir have been admitted to MBBS course in

July, 2004 rendering two free seats available. Suffice it to say that availability of a free seat is undisputed.

In the aforementioned backdrop, the writ petition succeeds. It is allowed with a direction to the respondents to treat the petitioner to have been

selected against free seat in SKUAST Kashmir and take necessary steps forthwith, if any, required towards obedience of the mandate of this

judgment including refunding the fee.

Disposed of along with CMPs. No order as to costs.