ORDER
D. Reddeppa Reddi, J.
1. The common order dated 11-12-1997 of G. Bikashapathi, J. made in W.P. No. 23481/97 and batch, setting aside the admissions made by the University of Health Sciences (UHS) to the 1st year M.B.B.S. course for the academic year 1997-98 and directing the UHS represented by its Registrar and the Chairman, Under-graduate Admissions Committee, UHS, the respondents in the writ petitions, to make admissions for the same with the following directions :
1. The Common Entrance Test Committee shall forthwith prepare a merit list in accordance with Rule 6 of the A.P. Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission into Under-Graduate Professional Courses through Common Entrance Test) Rules, 1993 notified in G.O. Ms.No.184, Education EO-II dated 20-8-1993 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
2. The competent authority namely the University of Health Sciences shall prepare similar lists as contained in Rule 6(1), (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) in respect of the candidates who applied for admission to Government/University Professional Colleges and Private Professional Colleges.
3. The competent authority shall make' admissions to MBBS course reserving 85% scats to locals institution-wise subject to the community reservations and other non-statutory reservations made under the Admission Rules by the State Government. The competent authority shall also make admission separately to 15% unreserved seats institution-wise duly subjecting them to similar reservations as applicable to 85% local candidates.
4. In respect of State-wide institutions, 85% of available seats should be filled up by the concerned local area candidates in Andhra University area, Osmania University area and S.V. University area in the ratio of 42:36:22 subject to State reservations and 15% scats left open as unreserved seats shall be filled separately duly subjecting to State reservations.
5. In respect of private professional institutions, the relevant rule as applicable shall be followed duly observing the rules of reservations both in respect of free seats and payment seats subject to modifications mentioned in sub-rule (15) of Rule 7 of the Admission Rules in respect of Non-Resident Indians.
6. The admissions shall be made on the basis of merit ranking. They shall be made first to the local candidates in relation to relevant local area. Thereafter the admissions shall be made under unreserved quota after pooling up the unfilled seats if any local quota both OC and reserved categories.
7. In case of reserved candidates qualifying on merit for admission in OC category, the admissions shall be made on the basis of principles settled by theSupreme Court in Slate of Bihar and others v. M. Neethi Chandra and others, : (1996)6SCC36 .
8. In case of any doubt which may arise on account of implementation of the Rules of Admission or Presidential Order, it is open for the Health University to bring it to the Notice of the Government which shall consider the same and tender proper advice.
9. This exercise shall be done within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. It is also appropriate for the State Government to oversee the admissions and if necessary place at the disposal of the Health University, the services of competent persons if sought by the Health University to accomplish the time bound schedule.
10. For the purpose of proper counselling the authorities shall give wide publicity for the information of candidates through various news papers apart from Radio and Television net work.
is questioned in this batch of writ appeals by some of those who were admitted into different medical colleges in the State as per the first counselling, but denied admission to the same in the second counselling held pursuant to the directions mentioned above. Others have chosen to file the present writ petitions questioning the cancellation of admissions given to them as per the first counselling. It may be stated here that though no formal order was passed cancelling the admissions made pursuant to the first counselling, it is admitted that the process of selection made pursuant to the directions given in the order impugned in the writ appeals resulted in denial of admission to 63 or 64 BC candidates who were admitted into different Medical Colleges in the State basing on the selections made in the first counselling.
2. Admission to MBBS course are governed by the provisions of the AndhraPradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions) Order, 1974 made by the President of India in exercise of the powers conferred under clauses (1) and (2) of Article 371D of the Constitution of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Presidential Order), Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 (for short 'the Act') and the Andhra Pradesh Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission into Under-graduate Professional Courses through Common Entrance Test) Rules, 1998 (for short 'the EAMCET Rules) made in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 read with Section 15 of the A.P. Educational Institutions (Regulations of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 (for short 'the Act') and notified in G.O. Ms. No. 184, Education (EC-2), dated 20-8-1993.
3. We are relieved of much trouble since the learned Counsel on either side agree that directions 1 and 2 are in accordance with Ruie 6 of the EAMCET Rules; direction 4 is in accordance with paragraph 6 of the Presidential Order; and direction 5 is in accordance with sub-rules (5) and (15) of Rule 7 of the EAMCET Rules. They also agree that the admission of candidates belonging to reserved categories who could be admitted in OC category on the basis of their merit shall be made as per the principles enunciated by the Apex Court in Ritesh R. Sah v. Dr. Y.L Yamul, : [1996]2SCR695 , and to modify the direction 7 accordingly. They further agree to call the candidates for interview, which is generally called 'counselling' contemplated under sub-rule (6) of Rule 7 of the EAMCET Rules, simultaneously for both local and unreserved seats and to modify direction 6 accordingly. Directions 8, 9 and 10 are of general nature and they do not have direct bearing on the procedure for admissions.
4. We are also relieved of the trouble to go into the legality of the process of selectionadopted in the recounselling done pursuant to the directions of the learned single Judge that resulted in denial of admission to 63 or 64 BC candidates who were admitted into different medical colleges in the State basing on the selection made in the first counselling since it is stated by the learned Advocate-General appearing for the Government of Andhra Pradesh and UHS that these candidates have already been given admission as per our interim directions dated 11-2-1998 given in WAMP Nos.60/98, 15/98, 2879/97 and WAMP (SR) No. 10491/98 and similar directions given later in other connected cases by creating supernumerary seats and there is no likelihood of cancelling or disturbing their admissions. Even otherwise, we do feel that there is no case for interference with their present admission at this stage since their first admission was admittedly cancelled without giving any notice to them. We are also sure that the Medical Council of India will take these factors into consideration while dealing with the request of the Government either for enhancement of seats or for according approval for creation of supernumerary scats.
5. In view of the above, it is redundant to make further probe into admissions made to 1st year MBBS course for the academic year 1997-98 with which we are concerned in this batch of writ appeals and writ petitions. However, we consider it expedient to lay down the principles/guidelines in clear terms for future years since this issue will crop up every year and we are told that the counselling for the academic year 1998-99 has to be taken up shortly. In this view of the matter, it has become necessary for us to deal with direction No.3 about which there is some controversy.
6. Direction No.3 has already been extracted. However, for ready reference it is again extracted. It runs as follows :
'The competent authority shall make admissions to MBBS course reserving 85% seats to locals institution-wise subject tothe community reservations and other non-statutory reservations made under the Admission Rules by the State Government. The competent authority shall also make admission separately to 15% unreserved seats institution-wise duly subjecting them to similar reservations as applicable to 85% local candidates.'
7. Learned Counsel for the appellantsand the petitioners have no serious objectioneven to the above direction. But they takestrong exception to the finding of the learnedsingle Judge that there should be no reservationon University Area-wise on the followingreasoning:
'While Rule 5 of the Presidential order aims at admission of local candidates to the extent of 85% of the available seats in every course of study provided by the University or any Educational Institution which is subject to the control of the State Government, even in Rule 8(1) of the Admission Rules, it is clearly mentioned that 85% seats in each course shall be reserved for local candidates. Further in Rule 8(2), the reservations are provided in each course in each institution for SC/ST/ BC, Women etc. This indicates that the reservation has to be made institution-wise. If the reservation is to be made on the basis of University area-wise, it would not conform to the percentage of seats exclusively reserved for locals. On the other hand, if 85% of the seats are to be filled up exclusively by the local candidates in each institution subject to the reservations made by the State Government for SC, ST, BC etc., the imbalance would not persist. Therefore, the only inevitable interpretation that can be drawn in para 5 of the Presidential Order and also Rule 8 of the Admission Rules is that 85% of the available seats should be reserved in each course and in each institution. In other words, the order and the Rules aim at institution-wise reservations and not University area-wise. That is why, in para 5of the Presidential Order, it specifically refers to the available seats in every course of study provided by the Educational Institutions. Similarly, in Rule 8(2) of the Admission Rules, it is mentioned that so and so percentage of seats in each course in each institution shall be reserved for candidates belonging to various communities. Thus, I hold that in each institution, in the instant case, in each Medical College offering MBBS course, 85% of the seats shall be reserved for locals subject to community and other reservations and 15% of the seats shall be left open.'
8. Learned Counsel for the appellants and the petitioners assail the above reasoning on several counts. They maintain that the way paragraph 5 of the Presidential Order and Rule 8 of the EAMCET Rules was interpreted by the learned single Judge is contrary to the settled principles of statutory interpretation. According to them, there is no absolute ambiguity in the above provisions and in no way they indicate institution-wise reservation of seats. They submit that the provisions of Rules 6(1)(b) and 8(1) of the EAMCET Rules specifically contemplate region-wise reservation of seats. The term region or region-wise used in the rules is directly referrable to local areas defined in sub-paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of paragraph 3 of the Presidential Order and explanations (1)(a), (b) and (c) to sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the EAMCET Rules. In opposition, the learned Advocate General tries to sustain the order of the learned single Judge, placing strong reliance on the term 'educational institution' used in paragraph 8 of the Presidential Order. On consideration of these submissions, the points that emerge for our consideration may be formulated as under:
1. Whether University area-wise reservation of seats is not contemplated under the Presidential Order and/or the EAMCET Rules
2. What is the just and proper mode of reservation of seats in MBBS course
Point No. 1 : The Presidential Order deals, in general, with admission to any course of study in all educational institutions in the State of Andhra Pradesh, which are subject to the control of the State Government, excepting those saved under paragraph 11 thereof. For the said purpose, it divided the State into 3 local areas as stated in paragraph 3, which reads as under:
'3. Local Area :-(1) The part of the State comprising the districts of Srikakulam, Visakhapatnam, West Godavari, East Godavari, Krishna, Guntur and Prakasam shall be regarded as the local area for the purpose of admission to the Andhra University, the Nagarjuna University and to any other educational institution (other than State-wide University or State-wide educational institution) which is subject to the control of the State Government and is situated in that part.
(2) The part of the State comprising districts of Adilabad, Hyderabad, Karimnagar, Khammam, Mahaboobnagar, Medak, Nalgonda, Nizamabad and.Warangal shall be regarded as the local area for the purpose of admission to the Osmania University, the Kakatiya University and to any other educational institution (other than a State-wide University or State-wide educational institution) which is subject to the control of the State Government and is situated in that part.
(3) The part of the State comprising the districts of Anantapur, Cuddapah, Kurnool, Chittoor and Nellore shall be regarded as the local area for the purposes of admission to Sri Venkateswara University and to any other educational institution (other than a State-wide University or State-wide educational institution) which is subject to the control of the State Government and is situated in that part'
It may be stated here that the Districts of Anantapur and Kumool referred to in sub-paragraph (3) have been deleted from the area of Sri Venkateswara University and added to Sri Krishnadevaraya University consequent on the establishment of Sri Krishnadevaraya University in the year 1981. It is also necessary to mention that consequent on the enactment of the University of Health Sciences Act, 1986 and by virtue of the provisions of Section 8 thereof all the medical colleges and other institutions specified in First Schedule therein stood dis-affiliated from the respective Universities and affiliated to UHS.
9. 'Local areas' are again specified in the explanation (1)(a), (b) and (c) to Rule 8 of the EAMCET Rules. They are as under :
'(i) The Local Area means :
(a) The part of the State comprising the districts of Adilabad, Hyderabad (including twin cities), Ranga Reddy, Karimnagar, Khammam, Medak, Mahaboobnagar, Nalgonda, Nizamabad and Warangal shall be regarded as the Osmania University Local Area (Telangana).
(b) The part of the State comprising the districts of Srikakulam, Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam, East Godavari, West Godavari, Krishna, Guntur and Prakasam shall be regarded as the Andhra University Local Area (Andhra).
(c) The part of the State comprising the districts of Anantapur, Kurnool, Chittoor, Cuddapah and Nellore shall be regarded as the Sri Venkateswara University Local Area (Rayalaseema).'
It is, thus, clear that the local areas specified in sub-paragraphs (2)(1) and (3) of paragraph 3 of the Presidential Order are shown as the 'Osmania University Local Area', 'Andhra University Local Area', and 'Sri Venkateswara University Local Area'respectively. It is significant to note that in the explanation to Rule 8 'Osmania University Local Area' is shown in bracket as 'Telangana', which, in our considered view, has to be understood in the context only as 'Telangana Region'. Likewise, 'Andhra University Local Area' and 'Sri Venkateswara University Local Area' have to be understood as 'Andhra Region' and 'Rayalaseema Region' respectively.
10. As already noted, the conclusion of the learned single Judge that University-wise reservation of seats is not contemplated is mainly based on the use of words 'every course of study provided by the University or any educational institution' in paragraph 5 of the Presidential Order and 'in each course' in sub-rules (1) and (2) of Rule 8 of the EAMCET Rules. Since this conclusion is the main target of attack, it requires close scrutiny with reference to the above referred provisions.
11. Paragraph 5 of the Presidential Order deals with reservation in non-State-wide Universities and educational institutions. It reads as under:
'5. Reservation in non-State-wide Universities and educational institutions :--(1) Admission to eighty five percent of the available seats in every course of study provided by the Andhra University, the Nagarjuna University, the Osmania University, the Kakatiya University or Sri Venkateswara University or by any educational institution (other than a Statewide University or a State-wide educational institution) which is subject to the control of the State Government shall be reserved in favour of the local candidates in relation to the local area in respect of such University or other educational institution.
(2) While determining under sub-paragraph (1) the number of seats to be reserved in favour of local candidates any fraction of a seat shall be counted as one:
Provided that there shall be at least one unreserved seat.'
12. There can be little doubt that the above provision primarily aims at reserving 85% of the available seats in every course of study offered by all colleges; located in the respective local area specified in paragraph 3 in favour of local candidates.
13. Paragraph 4 defines 'local candidates' as under:
'4. Local candidates :-(1) A candidate for admission to any course of study shall be regarded as a local candidate in relation to a local area -
(a) If he has studied in an educational institution or educational institution in such local area for a period of not less than four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination; or
(b) Where, during the whole or any part of the four consecutive academic years ending with the academic year in which he appeared or, as the case may be first appeared for the relevant qualifying examination, he has not studied in any educational institution, if he has resided in that local area for a period of not less than four years immediately preceding the date of commencement of the relevant qualifying examination in which he appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared.
(2) xxxx, (a) xxxx, (b) xxxx . Explanation :-For the purpose of this paragraph,--
(i) 'educational institution' means a University or any educational institutionrecognised by the State Government, a University or other competent authority; (ii) xxxx;(iii) xxxx;(iv) xxxx.'
14. It is evident from the above that categorisation of local candidates has been made with reference to the educational institution where the candidate has studied and the local area where such educational institution is situate. Thus, on a combined reading of the provisions of paragraph 3, 4 and 5 of the Presidential Order, we are of the clear view that paragraph 5 contemplates reservation of 85% of the available seats in every course on local area wise or University area-wise and not institution/college-wise. This is how the Government also understood the mode of reservation contemplated under paragraphs 5 and 6 and the same is evident from G.O.Ms.No.749 Education, Educational Department dated 24-8-1974 whereunder instructions were issued regarding the manner of selection of local candidates. In this context, it is enough to refer to Clause 2 of Annexure-I to the said G.O. which runs as under :
'2. The number of seats reserved in favour of local candidates in relation to the local area in respect of the University or other educational institution concerned shall then be determined; this number shall be 85% of the available seats, any fraction of a seat being counted as one provided that there shall be at least one unreserved seat.'
15. Sub-rules (1) and (2) of Rule 8 of the EAMCET Rules that deal with region-wise reservation of scats and reservation of seats for S.C./S.T./B.C. communities read as under:
'(1) Region-wise reservation of seats :-
(a) Admission to 85% of the seats in each course, excluding the seats which are exempted from the need of CommonEntrance Test, shall be reserved for the local candidates and 15% of the seats shall be left over for open competition as specified in the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission) Order, 1974 as amended in G.O.P.No.646, Education (W) Department dated 10-7-1979.
(b) In respect of State-wide Institutions and State-wide Universities admission into 85% of seats, excluding the seats which are exempted from the need of Common Entrance Test, in each course, shall be reserved for the candidates belonging to the three local areas in the State specified in this sub-rule namely, Andhra University Area (Andhra), Osmania University Area (Telangana) and Sri Venkateswara University Area (Rayalaseema) in the ratio of 42:36:22 respectively and the balance of 15% seats shall be left for open competition.
(c) xxxx.(i) xxxx.(a) xxxx.(b) xxxx.(c) xxxx.(ii) xxxx.(A) xxxx.(B) xxxx.(C) xxxx. (2) Reservation of seats for SC/ST/BC communities :-(a) 15% and 6% of seats in each course in each Institution shall be reserved for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes respectively.
XXXXX 25% seats in each course in each Institution shall be reserved for the candidates belonging to the Backward Classes and shall be allocated among the four group of Backward Classes as shown below: 'A' 7% Group 'C' 1%Group 'B' 10% Group 'D' 7% xxxx. xxxx.'
Rule 8, in general, deals with the rules of reservation. It is clear from the very heading of Rule 8(1) that it deals with region-wise reservation of seats. Thus, it is impossible to comprehend that it contemplates only institution-wise/college-wise reservation of seats. There can also be little doubt that Rule 8(2) deals with only percentage of seats reserved for SC/ST/BC communities from out of 85% of the seats available for local candidates in the respective region.
16. Learned Counsel on either side are fair enough to state before us that the principle which applies for reservation of 85% of the seats in the respective local area in favour of local candidates equally applies to the remaining 15% unreserved seats. The categories of candidates eligible to apply for admission to the said remaining 15% of unreserved seats arc shown in Explanation (ii)(c) in Rule 8(1) of the EAMCET Rules. It provides as under :
'(C) The following categories of candidates are eligible to apply for admission to the remaining 15% of the unreserved seats-
(a) All the candidates eligible to be declared as local candidates;
(b) Candidates who have resided in the State for a total period of ten years excluding periods of study outside the State or either of whose parents have resided in the State for a period of ten years excluding period of employment outside the State.
(c) Candidates who are children of parents who are in the employment of this State or Central Government, Public Sector Corporations, Local Bodies,Universities and other similar quasi-Public Institutions, within the State.
(d) Candidates who are spouses of those in the employment of the State or Central Government, Public Sector Corporations, Local Bodies, Universities and educational Institutions recognised by the competent authority and similar other quasi-Government institutions within the State.
(D) If a local candidate in respect of a local area is not available to fill any seat reserved or allocated in favour of a local candidate in respect of that local areas, such seat shall be filled in as it has been unreserved, in the order of ranking assigned in the common merit list.
Note .--For details, see the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission) Order, 1974 as amended in G.O.P.No.646, Education (W) Department dated 10-7-1979.'
17. In the light of the above, we are unable to pursuade ourselves to approve the conclusion of the learned single Judge that the reservation of seats on University Area-wise is not contemplated either under the Presidential Order or the EAMCET Rules. We, accordingly, set-aside the same. However, we make it clear that this conclusion of ours should not be understood as if the institution/ college-wise reservation is prohibited. As already noted above, the learned Counsel for the appellants and the petitioners have no objection to reserve 85% of the seats to local candidates and the remaining 15% of the seats to unreserved candidates in each institution/ college subject to observance of the procedure contemplated under Rules 6, 7 and 8 of the EAMCET Rules. We also feel that institution-wise/college-wise reservation as directed by the learned single Judge in direction No.3 is possible or even mandatory while maintaining the region-wise or University area-wise reservation as contemplated under the Presidential Order or the EAMCET Rules. This aspect of the matter will be considered,in detail, while dealing with point No.2. The point is, accordingly, answered.
Point No.2 : As already recorded above, there is consensus between the learned Counsel on either side on all aspects excepting the issue considered under point No.1. We have elaborately considered the said issue and concluded that for the purpose of admission into educational institutions the State of A.P., is divided into 3 local areas/University local areas/regions i.e., Osmania University Local Area (Telangana Region), Andhra University Local Area (Andhra Region) and Sri Venkateswara University Local Area (Rayalaseema Region) and admission to 85% of the available seats in the respective University Local Area/Region shall be reserved in favour of local candidates and the remaining 15% of unreserved seats in favour of such categories of candidates specified in clause 3 of Explanation (ii) in Rule 8. We have also indicated that the application of the ratio of reservation of seats in the respective University Local Area may possibly be extended to each institution/ college situate within the said University Local Area.
18. Keeping the above conclusions in mind, we proceed to consider the present point. On this aspect, there is no dispute that preparation of merit lists as contemplated under Rule 6(1)(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) is mandatory. The said rule provides as under :
'(1) The Common Entrance Test Committee shall prepare the following categories of Merit lists separately for Engineering and Non-Engineering (Agriculture and Medical) Courses in the order of marks obtained by the candidates in the Common Entrance Test:
(a) State-wide common merit list :- This list shall include candidates irrespective of whether one belongs to any category of reservation quota or not basing on the marks obtained in the Common Entrance Test;
(b) Region-wise common merit list:- This list includes candidates belonging to the particular local area irrespective of whether one belongs to any category of reservation quota or not basing on the marks obtained in the Common Entrance Test;
(c) Concerned Minority Community merit lists :- They includes merit lists, containing the candidates belonging to the concerned minority community arranged in the merit ranking assigned in the Common Entrance Test both State-wide and Region-wise';
(d) Caste-wise common merit lists :- There shall be separate merit lists for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and each group of Backward Classes communities both as State-wide lists and Region-wise lists;
(e) Merit List for other categories of reservations :- There shall be separate merit lists for other categories of reservations mentioned under sub-rule (4) of Rule (8) State-wide and Region-wise. 2. xxxx.3. xxxx.4. xxxx.'
19. Clause (b) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 8 provides for reservation of seats for categories other than SC, ST and BC communities in Medical and Dental courses. There is no controversy about any of these provisions. The next stage is making admissions into Government/University Professional Colleges/ Regional Engineering Colleges and Private Professional Colleges as per the procedure prescribed under Rule 7. There is also no controversy about any of the provisions of Rule 7. However, we will refer to sub-rule (6) of Rule 7, which we consider as very much relevant for our purpose, for, it deals with counselling to the candidates at the time of interview. It reads as under:
'(6) Candidates who have secured higher ranks at the Entrance Test will be called for an interview in the order of merit for selection and allotment of course/branches/institutions. For the convenience of the candidates, representatives of all University Professional Colleges, Regional Engineering Colleges, Warangal and Private Professional Colleges in the State shall sit at a common table. As and when each candidate gets his turn for interview in the order of merit, choice of Institutions and Branch (Course of study) will be given to him, depending upon availability at the point of time with due regard to the eligibility of the candidate for a seat in a particular local area for a particular reserved category.'
It is clear from the above that a candidate will be offered a seat in a particular college situate in a particular local area for a particular reserved category depending upon the availability of seats at the time when he or she is called for interview on the basis of his or her rank in the concerned merit list. At this juncture, it is appropriate to refer to paragraph 10 of the Prospectus relating to admission into first year M.B.B.S. course. It reads:
'10. Selections : Selections will be made by the selection committee appointed by Vice-Chancellor, University of Health Science for M.B.B.S. to the affiliated Colleges. Selections shall be made local area-wise for non-State wide institutions and as per ratio fixed for State-wide institutions (except army) i.e., as per the procedure prescribed in annexure-iii and iv respectively of G.O.P.NO.646, Education dated 10-7-1997 and as per master merit list based on preference given by the candidates at the time of selections/ counselling. In case of candidates of reserved categories (i.e. SC/ST/BC/Army etc.) who got selection under OC category will be allotted to colleges at their preferenceby shifting the candidates of the respectivecategories.
Candidates shall submit the names of the colleges of their choice in the order of their preference at the time of selections/ counselling for consideration of their admission to those colleges.
While allotting the seats in each individual college the selection committee shall see that the reservation categories and OC category are maintained as per the percentage of reservations as far as possible. In case of fraction arising, the selection committee shall be final authority to make suitable adjustments.
When a candidate obtains seat both under the reserved category of social status and under army quota, NCC, PHC, S & G, he will be deemed to have been selected under the category of social status only. The candidates provisionally selected into one college will be considered for resultant vacancies in another college of higher preference.
The resultant vacancies can be filled as per Regulations.'
It is clear from the above that selections shall be local area-wise/Region-wise/University Area-wise for non-State wide institutions and as per the ratio fixed for State-wide institutions as per the procedure prescribed in Annexure (iii) and (iv) respectively of G.O,P.No.646 (Education (W) Department dated 10-7-1979. What is worth noting herein is that 'while allotting the seats in each individual college the selection committee shall see that the reservation categories and OC categories are maintained as per the percentage of reservations as far as possible.' In this process, it becomes imperative to allot local candidates and open candidates to each individual college proportionate to the number of seats available in such individual college. In other words, at the stage of allotting the candidates from out of the lists prepared as per Rule 6(1)(b), (d) and (e) to each individual college it ismandatory that the selection committee or thecompetent authority shall see that 85% of theseats in such college are filled with localcandidates and the remaining 15% unreservedseats with open candidates subject toobservance of rules of reservations for S.C.,S.T., and B.C., communities and other reservedcategories specified in clause (b) of sub-rule (4)of Rule 8. We are, thus, of the consideredview that such procedure alone would be justand proper for filling up seats in each individualcollege and any other mode would result inbreach of rules regulating region-wisereservation of seats as well as the rulesgoverning the reservation of SC, ST, and BCcommunities and others. This point isaccordingly answered.
20. In the light of the above discussion, we direct the respondents not to cancel or disturb the provisional admission given to the appellants or the petitioners, as the case may be, in the 1st year MBBS course for the academic year 1997-98 pursuant to our interim directions in the cases on hand. We, however, make it clear that the respondents will be free to consider their request for general transfer from one college, to the other as per rules. We, further, direct the respondents to observe the following procedure for making admissions to 1st year M.B.B.S. course for the academic year 1998-99 and onwards as long as the present rules are in force.
1. The Common Entrance Test Committee shall prepare a merit list in accordance with Rule 6 of the EAMCET Rules notified in G.O.Ms.No.184 Education (EC-2) dated 20-8-1993.
2. The competent authority shall prepare merit lists as contemplated under Rule 6(1)(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) in respect of candidates who applied for admission to Government/University Professional Colleges and Private Professional Colleges.
3. The Selection Committee or the competent authority shall, whileallotting the candidates from out of the lists prepared as per Rule 6(1)(b), (d) and (e) to each individual college, see that 85% of the seats in such college are filled with local candidates and the remaining 15% unreserved seats with open candidates, maintaining the rules of reservation for SC, ST and BC communities and other reserved categories specified in clause (b) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 8 both in respect of local candidates as well as open candidates.
4. In respect of State-wide institutions, 85% of available seats should be filled up by the concerned authority shall be free to follow the other relevant rules or regulations that have not been specifically dealt with herein.
9. In case of any doubt that may arise in the course of implementation of the Presidential Order, the EAMCET Rules or any other rule or regulation, it is open for the UHS to approach the Government for appropriate directions.
21. The writ appeals and the writ petition are disposed of in the above terms.No costs.