AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
LPAOW No. 54/2014 & CMA No. 74/2014
Caveat No. 1688/2014 c/w LPAOW No. 55/2014
CMA Nos. 56/2014
Caveat No. 1689/2014
APLPA No. 56/2014
LPAOW No. 56/2014 & CMA No. 76/2014
The principal issue raised in three sets of appeals revolves around the seats allocated to NRI category for admission to post graduate course of
MS/MD.
In LPA No. 54/2014 the appellant-Ms. Shagun Mahajan is aggrieved by the directions issued by the learned Writ Court holding that her uncle
(father's brother), who is admittedly an NRI, would not be covered by para 131 of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in 2 the case
of P.A. Inamdar and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, . The operative part of the para 131 is quoted hereunder in extenso:-
A Limited reservation of such seats, not exceeding 15%, in our opinion, may be made available to NRIs depending on the discretion of the
management subject to two conditions. First, such seats should be utilized bona fide by NRIs only and for their children or wards. Secondly, within
this quota, merit should not be given a complete go-by. The amount of money, in whatever form collected from such NRIs, should be utilized for
benefiting students such as from economically weaker sections of the society, whom, on well-defined criteria, the educational institution may admit
on subsidized payment of their fee. To prevent misutilisation of such quota or any malpractice referable to NRI quota seats, suitable legislation or
regulation needs to be framed. So long as the State does not do it, it will be for the Committees constituted pursuant to the direction in Islamic
Academy to regulate.
The learned Writ Court did not accept that father's brother of the appellant was qualified to confer any benefit on his niece under the NRI quota
seats. Feeling aggrieved, LPAOW No. 54/2014 by the appellant-Ms. Shagun Mahajan and LPAOW Nos. 55/2014 & 56/2014 by Acharya Shri
Chander College of Medical Sciences & Hospital, have been filed.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that para 131 in letter and spirit would not permit exclusion of uncle
sponsoring his nephew or niece. In our view, the spirit of para 131 is that nobody should be permitted to take a seat under NRI quota unless he
has such relations living abroad, who could come forward in a bona fide manner to pay the foreign exchange for admission 3 to the post graduate
course in medical science. In fact it was in the same vein that the learned Writ Court has accepted father-in-law sponsoring the daughter-in-law of
NRI seat and the admission given to Misbah Tabassum has been upheld.
In view of the above the appeals are admitted to hearing as many other issues have been raised.
Meanwhile, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed.
List again on 20.10.2014.