AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.K. Misra, J.—The appellant in W.A. No. 3386 of 2004 had filed W.P. No. 9740 of 2004 for quashing the prospectus for admission to
M.B.B.S. Course for the academic year 2004-2005 in Jawaharlal Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research, Pondicherry
(hereinafter referred to as ""JIPMER"").
His Minor son S. Vijayashankar, had filed W.P. No. 15652 of 2004 for issuing certiorarified mandamus challenging the selection of respondents 4
to 12 in respect of the quota meant for Scheduled Caste candidates of Pondicherry and consequently direct admission of the petitioner to 1st year
of M.B.B.S. Course for the academic year 2004-2005 in JIPMER. W.A. No. 3311 of 2004 has been filed by such petitioner.
JIPMER is an Institute financed and administered by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India through the Directorate
General of Health Services, New Delhi. Such Institute is affiliated to the Pondicherry University and provides instruction for MBBS Course. As
per Clause 3.1 of the prospectus for the year 2004-2005, 75 seats were available for admission. Such seats were distributed as under :-
(a) Open General 14
(b) Open Scheduled Caste 8
(c) Open Scheduled Tribe 4
(d) Pondicherry General 15
(e) Pondicherry Scheduled caste 5
(f) Seats to be filled on the basis of Common All India Entrance Test by CBSE 11
(g) Government of India nomination subject to fulfilment of basic requirements laid down, vide para 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 18 Total 75
The questions raised in these writ appeals relate to 5 seats under Clause 3.1(e), namely, Pondicherry Scheduled Caste. Clause 3.5.1 is to the
following effect :-
3.5.1 Definition of Pondicherry Union Territory Residents: The 20 Seats reserved for Pondicherry General and Pondicherry Scheduled Caste are
open to applicants who are Pondicherry Residents provided he/she is an Indian National and satisfies either of the following two criteria:
(a) Those candidates / their parents residing continuously in the Union Territory of Ponidcherry for at least five years immediately preceding the
date of application.
(b) Children of Central/State Government Servants, including employees of Public Sector undertaking under the Central/State Government posted
and serving in the Union Territory of Pondicherry for at least a minimum period of ONE year prior to the last date for submission of application.
The controversy relating to 5 seats of Pondicherry Scheduled Caste is to the effect that as per the appellants in W.A. No. 3311 and 3386 of
2004, while considering the eligibility, the candidates who are Scheduled Caste in accordance with the Notification issued by the President under
Article 341 of the Constitution in respect of Pondicherry Union Territory should alone be considered as eligible and the candidates who are
Scheduled Caste as per the Presidential Notification in respect of other States and have migrated to Pondicherry should not be considered as
eligible under such category, though such candidates would be eligible under Clause 3.1 (b), namely, Open Scheduled caste. According to the
learned Counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.Nos.3311 and 3386 of 2004, is to the effect that since provision has been made for Open
Scheduled Caste candidates belonging to any part of the country, under which migrant Scheduled Caste candidates can be considered, it is highly
arbitrary and illegal to consider such migrant Scheduled Caste candidates, for the category meant for Pondicherry Scheduled Caste candidates.
According to him, as decided by the Supreme Court in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao Vs. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College and Others, , which
has been followed in Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and
Another Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Another, , only the candidates of Pondicherry origin, who are included in the notification issued by the
President as Scheduled Caste for Union Territory of Pondicherry, should be considered eligible.
Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents has submitted that the Institute has been established by the Central
Government. Following the consistent policy in such matters, reservation has been made in respect of Scheduled Caste candidates belonging to
any State or Union Territory throughout India. Such candidates have been made eligible for being considered under ""Open Scheduled Caste"". He
has further submitted that the Institute has been established within Pondicherry, as a special concession 20 seats have been set apart for the local
candidates out of which 15 seats have been set apart for Pondicherry General candidates and 5 seats have been set apart for Pondicherry
Scheduled Caste. For the aforesaid purpose, as per the prospectus those candidates/their parents residing continuously in the Union Territory of
Pondihcerry for at least five years immediately preceding the date of application are eligible. Similarly, the children of Central/State Government
Servants, including employees of Public Sector undertaking under the Central/State Government posted and serving in the Union Territory of
Pondicherry for at least a minimum period of one year prior to the last date of the application are eligible. He has submitted that a similar question
had been raised earlier and the Madras High Court had already upheld the validity of such arrangement in the decision reported in 2000 Writ LR
496 (Puvvala Sujatha v. Union of India and Ors.).
Mr. Ajaya Kumar has placed strong reliance upon Marri Chandra Shekar Rao''s case and Action Committee''s case. The first case related to a
person who was considered to be a Scheduled Tribe as per the Presidential Notification relatable to Andhra Pradesh. Such candidate and his
father had migrated to Maharashtra. However, the Tribe to which he belonged was not included in the Presidential notification as a Scheduled
Tribe for Maharashtra, and therefore, such candidate was not given the privilege of reservation as a Scheduled Tribe candidate for admission to
college within Maharashtra. The Supreme Court negatived the plea of such candidate by holding that a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe in a
particular State is entitled to claim privilege for admission to college in his parents'' State but he is not entitled to claim any such privilege if he
migrates to another State. The question as well as the answer in the Action Committee''s case was almost similar.
In our opinion, the ratio of the aforesaid two decisions of the Supreme Court is not applicable to the present case. In the present case, the
question is not in relation to admission to a college coming under the control of any State or even Union Territory. As already indicated, the
Institute has been established by the Central Government.
The principle adopted in the Prospectus is in consonance with the principle adopted for employment under the Central Government, wherein the
benefit/privilege of reservation is open to all persons who are declared to be Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in the Presidential notification
applicable to various States and Union Territories. It is of course true that 5 seats have been earmarked for Pondicherry Scheduled Caste.
However, those seats have not been confined to Scheduled Caste candidates of Pondicherry origin only. A person, who is considered as
Scheduled Caste as per the Presidential notification applicable to any of the States or the Union Territories, is also entitled to the benefit of such
category of Pondicherry Scheduled Caste, provided such candidate or his parents is residing continuously within the Union Territory of
Pondicherry for at least 5 years or such candidate is the child of a Central/State Government servant posted and serving in the Union Territory of
Pondicherry for a period of one year. The basic intention is to provide the benefit to the residents of Pondicherry or who are employed within
Pondicherry in connection with the Central/State Government or Public Sector undertakings.
The question can be viewed from another angle. It is not disputed that so far as the Government of Pondicherry is concerned, even in respect of
employment in connection with such Government, provisions have been made for reservation which had also been extended to migrant Scheduled
Caste candidates. The validity and propriety of such provisions had been challenged successfully before the Central Administrative Tribunal and
ultimately the matter had gone to the Supreme Court in S. Pushpa and Others Vs. Sivachanmugavelu and Others, , wherein the Supreme Court has
observed as follows :-
The policy of the Government of India, whereunder all SC/ST candidates get benefit in the matter of appointment and admission in educational
institutions controlled/administered by the Central Government has been reproduced in para 18 of the judgment in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao
and the relevant part thereof reads as under: (SCC p.145)
I. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are entitled to derive benefits of the all-India services or admissions in the educational institutions
controlled/administered by the Central Government, irrespective of the State to which they belong. The reservation in force in favour of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in filling vacancies in posts and services under the Government of India are as in the enclosure (Chapter II
of the Brochure on the Reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Services issued by the Government of India)
In our opinion, the ratio of the said decision would be squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. Even in Marri
Chandra Shekar Rao''s case it has been well recognised that admissions in the Educational Institutions controlled / administered by the Central
Government, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are entitled to derive benefit irrespective of the State to which they belong.
In view of the above, it is difficult to accept the contention raised by Mr. Ajayakumar to the effect that the category ""Pondicherry Scheduled
Caste"" must be construed as ""Scheduled Caste candidates of Pondicherry origin"" as per the Presidential notification for the Union Territory of
Pondicherry.
Learned counsel has also raised certain contentions relating to percentage of reservation made. He has submitted that only 8 seats had been
reserved for open Scheduled Caste, whereas 15% of 75 seats would be minimum 11.
Learned Additional Solicitor General has pointed out that out of 75 seats, 18 seats had been earmarked for Government of India nomination
for which selection process was different and, therefore, out of balance 57 seats, as per the selection held by JIPMER, 15% came to 8 seats, and
therefore, there is no illegality.
In our opinion, it is unnecessary to consider such controversy as it is obvious that even assuming three more seats would have been earmarked
under open Scheduled Caste category, the present aggrieved candidate would not have been benefited. There is no dispute that the appellant in
W.A. No. 3386 of 2004 was also eligible to be considered under Clause 3.1(e) read with 3.5.1 and yet other selected candidates had secured
more marks than him. Therefore, even if three more seats would have been ear-marked under Open Scheduled Caste category, the candidates
who were selected on the basis of Clause 3.1(e) read with 3.5.1 would have secured higher ranking. The contention raised, therefore, would be of
no avail to the appellants. Moreover, the prospectus was for the year 2004-2005 and the petitioner has already got admission in another college
affiliated to the very same Pondicherry University. It is not his case that he should be considered for admission to the first year MBBS Course in
this year, but his contention is that he should have been admitted last year in JIPMER.
It is of course true that one seat had been kept reserved, but reservation of that seat for the year 2004-2005 in first year MBBS Course would
be of no avail. Such seats which were kept reserved for the year 2004-2005 cannot be added to the total number of seats of 75 for the current
year. In that sense it is apparent that such seats have gone waste.
In course of hearing, it transpired that possibly such seats which were vacated during fist year of 2004-2005 in JIPMER are also lying vacant
in second year of MBBS Course of 2004-2005. The appellant in W.A. No. 3311 of 2004 is studying in another college which is affiliated to the
very same University, namely, Pondicherry University. It is therefore obvious that courses of study are the same.
In such view of the matter, it is observed that it would be open to the appellant in W.A. No. 3311 of 2004 to file appropriate application
before JIPMER, the University as well as the Medical Council of India seeking permission to get transfer from the existing college to JIPMER, if
there is any vacancy in JIPMER in the subsequent year of MBBS Course which commenced in 2004-2005. Such application may be
sympathetically considered in the light of the fact that the appellant being a member of Scheduled Caste obviously comes from socially and may be
economically backward class and keeping a vacant seat in second or subsequent year of MBBS of 2004-2005 would be of no particular benefit
to JIPMER or the University or the Medical Council of India.
In view of the above discussion, W.A. No. 3386 of 2004 is dismissed and W.A. No. 3311 of 2004 is disposed of subject to the observation
made in paragraph 17. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.