Rohit Jain vs State of Punjab and Others

G.S. Sandhawalia, J.—The present petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondents to admit the petitioner in the first year B.E. Technical Planning at the School of Planning run by Guru Nanak Dev University or any other Engineering/Technical College running B.E. Course within the state of Punjab and for quashing Annexure P-4, the guidelines for the nomination on the discretionary quota seats. The pleaded case of the petitioner was that the admission to all engineering colleges in the State of Punjab was under the supervision of respondent No. 1 and the first year B.E. Course seats were to be filled and the task of holding the competition examination known as the entrance test was entrusted to one of the universities every year and for the year in controversy, the task was entrusted to Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. That the university in pursuance of the above objective issued information brochure-cum-application form whereby 2% of the seats were reserved for sports persons to be segregated on the basis of the Punjab Government directions and the petitioner was eligible and liable to be considered against the 2% seats reserved. The petitioner had appeared in the common entrance test held on 29.05.2004 and secured 63 marks out of 300 marks i.e. 21% but was informed that under the amended eligibility criteria, candidates who have secured 24% marks or more than 24% marks in the CET examination, were eligible to be considered for admission. Accordingly, it was pleaded that eligible candidates having more than 24% marks were not available and the State Government illegally made large number of nominations i.e. 22 in number to various engineering colleges of the State and the seats meant for sports persons were given to those persons nominated by the State Government. It was pleaded that Punjab Government had decided to relax the eligibility criteria and vide notice dated 01.09.1994, reduced the eligibility criteria of the vacant seats from 24% to 15% and, therefore, the petitioner was entitled to be considered for admission.

Written statement was filed by respondent No. 1 and it was submitted that the State Government reduced the minimum qualifying marks in CET from 24% to 15% for admission in various Engineering Colleges/Institutions with a view to facilitate admission against unfilled seats only under general/other categories.

In the written statement filed by respondent No. 2, it was contended that the petitioner had not passed his 10+2 in the State of Punjab and, therefore, he was not eligible for admission to any Engineering course run by the respondent-University and the unfilled seats were thrown open to the general category as per the Rules given in the Information Brochure. The vacant seats were filled up on 21.08.1994 from general category candidates and there were no vacant seats lying in the reserved category.

Written statement was filed by respondent No. 4, wherein it was denied that any seat in the sports category was filled by way of nomination. The nomination was made to the respondent-college by the State Government on the additional seats created.

Respondent No. 8 justified the admission of respondent No. 7 that she was adjusted against the overall sanctioned strength of the college of 260 seats for the session 1994-95 and she has not been admitted towards any seats belonging to the sports quota.

Vide order dated 11.01.1995, the writ petition was admitted for regular hearing and it was directed that the petitioner be admitted provisionally in the Engineering Course at College of Engineering and Technology, Bathinda, if there is a seat vacant in a discipline for which the petitioner is eligible. An application was filed for clarification of the order which was disposed of on 10.02.1995 and the Division Bench of this Court observed that the petitioner had to be admitted in the seat which was vacant and it was not necessary that the seat was to be vacant in the sports quota and it was further clarified that the petitioner was to be allowed to attend all classes subject to payment of all dues.

Counsel for respondent No. 4 has informed this Court that the petitioner had passed out of the college in pursuance of the interim order of this Court. None has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner and notice was issued and a report was received that he was not residing at the given address at present. That a period of more than 17 years has elapsed since the interim order was passed by this Court on 11.01.1995 and the petitioner must have taken benefit of the passing out and taken employment thereafter on the strength of the provisional certificate issued by the college. The Division Bench of this Court in its wisdom had granted interim admission and, therefore, it would be highly unfair and unjust at this point not to confirm the interim order passed by this Court.

The grouse of the petitioner, as noticed above, was that the eligibility criteria has been reduced from 24% to 15% and once this fact is admitted by the State that the qualifying marks had been reduced from 24% to 15% for general seats, then the said benefit was granted to the petitioner who had applied against the reserved seats in sports quota by the Division Bench.

Accordingly, in view of the above sequence of events, the writ petition is allowed and it is directed that the provisional admission given to the petitioner shall stand confirmed. Respondent No. 4-college and respondent No. 1-university would issue the petitioner the final certificate of the course that the petitioner has passed out, if not already granted. Since counsel for the petitioner is not present, there is no order as to costs.