Asha D. Bhatt Vs. Director of Primary Education and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- - the learned judges of this court has referred the judgment of the hon'ble supreme court in the matter of indra sawhney (supra) and has held that, this is clearly impermissible in view of the aforesaid decision of the supreme court.orderr.m. doshit, j.1. heard the learned advocates.2. pursuant to the advertisement published in the month of july, 1994, the petitioner had applied for admission to primary teachers training college in the state of gujarat. the admissions were processed by the centralized recruitment process. the results thereof was published in the newspaper on 9th december, 1994. the admissions to the female candidates of unreserved category stopped at 75.42%. admittedly, the petitioner had not secured such high marks. she, therefore, could not secure admission to the primary teachers training college. feeling aggrieved, she has preferred the present petition.3. the contention is two fold. mr. shah has submitted that as disclosed in the results published on 9th december. 1994, certain seats were reserved for economically backward class candidates. mr. shah has submitted that the advertisement [annexure-a to the petition] did not refer to any reservation for economically backward class candidates. had such mention been made, the petitioner could have applied in the category of economically backward class candidates. the petitioner has thus been denied an opportunity of admission as a reserved category candidate. he has also submitted that in any view of the matter, the reservation on the sole criterion of economic conditions i.e., for economically backward class candidates is unconstitutional and requires to be set aside. mr. shah has submitted that existing rules governing admission to pre-primary and primary teachers colleges namely the gujarat educational institutions [pre-primary and primary teachers training colleges] rules. 1984 [hereinafter referred to as. 'the rules of 1984'] have been amended under the government notification dated 28th october, 1994 by the gujarat educational institutions [pre-primary and primary teachers training colleges] (3rd amendment) rules. 1994. under the said rules prior to its amendment on 28th october, 1994, under clause 4 of appendix-v thereto, reservation in the matter of admission was made as under :--scheduledcaste 7%scheduled tribes socially andeducationally 14%backwardclasses 10%4. the said clause 4 since its amendment under the above referred notification dated 28th october, 1994 [3rd amendment] makes reservation as under :--scheduledcaste 7%scheduledtribes 14%sociallyand educationallybackward classes7%economically backward classes 2%5. mr. shah has submitted that article 15 of the constitution of india does not envisage reservation in the matter of admissions to an educational institution on the sole criterion of economic status and that is the view expressed by the hon'ble supreme court in the matter of indra sawhney v. union of india, air 1993 sc 477. nevertheless, the state government has, contrary to the above referred decision of the supreme court, provided for reservation solely on the basis of economic status which requires to be quashed and set aside. mr. shah has relied upon the judgment of the division bench of this court in the matter of state of gujarat v. bindu niranjan doctor [letters patent appeals nos. 698 of 1994 and 699 of 1994 : decided on 29th december, 1994 : coram b.n. kirpal, j. as he then was and a.n. divecha, j.]6. in the above referred judgment in the matter of re : bindu niranjan doctor (supra), a similar reservation based on the economic status of a candidate with respect to the admission in the medical college was the subject matter of challenge before this court. the learned judges of this court has referred the judgment of the hon'ble supreme court in the matter of indra sawhney (supra) and has held that, 'this is clearly impermissible in view of the aforesaid decision of the supreme court. this being so, the reservation of 2% is hereby quashed and set aside.'7. in view of the above judgments of the hon'ble supreme court and of this court, the reservation to the extent of 2% for economically backward classes made under clause 4 of appendix v of the rules of 1984 is contrary to article 15 of the constitution and requires to be quashed and set-aside,8. in the result, the petition is allowed with costs. sub-clause (iv) of clause 4(1) of appendix v to the rules of 1984, as amended under government notification dated 28th october, 1994, is quashed and set-aside. rule is made absolute accordingly. since the admission in question is that of 1994, in view of passage of time, no consequential orders are made.

Judgment:
ORDER

R.M. Doshit, J.

1. Heard the learned advocates.

2. Pursuant to the advertisement published in the month of July, 1994, the petitioner had applied for admission to Primary Teachers Training College in the State of Gujarat. The admissions were processed by the Centralized Recruitment process. The results thereof was published in the newspaper on 9th December, 1994. The admissions to the female candidates of unreserved category stopped at 75.42%. Admittedly, the petitioner had not secured such high marks. She, therefore, could not secure admission to the Primary Teachers Training College. Feeling aggrieved, she has preferred the present petition.

3. The contention is two fold. Mr. Shah has submitted that as disclosed in the results published on 9th December. 1994, certain seats were reserved for Economically Backward Class candidates. Mr. Shah has submitted that the advertisement [Annexure-A to the petition] did not refer to any reservation for Economically Backward Class candidates. Had such mention been made, the petitioner could have applied in the category of Economically Backward Class Candidates. The petitioner has thus been denied an opportunity of admission as a reserved category candidate. He has also submitted that in any view of the matter, the reservation on the sole criterion of economic conditions i.e., for Economically Backward Class candidates is unconstitutional and requires to be set aside. Mr. Shah has submitted that existing rules governing admission to Pre-Primary and Primary Teachers Colleges namely the Gujarat Educational Institutions [Pre-Primary and Primary Teachers Training Colleges] Rules. 1984 [hereinafter referred to as. 'the Rules of 1984'] have been amended under the Government Notification dated 28th October, 1994 by the Gujarat Educational Institutions [Pre-Primary and Primary Teachers Training Colleges] (3rd Amendment) Rules. 1994. Under the said Rules prior to its amendment on 28th October, 1994, under clause 4 of Appendix-V thereto, reservation in the matter of admission was made as under :--

ScheduledCaste

7%

Scheduled Tribes Socially andEducationally

14%

BackwardClasses

10%

4. The said clause 4 since its amendment under the above referred Notification dated 28th October, 1994 [3rd Amendment] makes reservation as under :--

ScheduledCaste

7%

ScheduledTribes

14%

Sociallyand EducationallyBackward Classes

7%

Economically Backward Classes

2%

5. Mr. Shah has submitted that Article 15 of the Constitution of India does not envisage reservation in the matter of admissions to an educational institution on the sole criterion of economic status and that is the view expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 477. Nevertheless, the State Government has, contrary to the above referred decision of the Supreme Court, provided for reservation solely on the basis of economic status which requires to be quashed and set aside. Mr. Shah has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of State of Gujarat v. Bindu Niranjan Doctor [Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 698 of 1994 and 699 of 1994 : Decided on 29th December, 1994 : Coram B.N. Kirpal, J. as he then was and A.N. Divecha, J.]

6. In the above referred judgment in the matter of Re : Bindu Niranjan Doctor (supra), a similar reservation based on the economic status of a candidate with respect to the admission in the medical college was the subject matter of challenge before this Court. The learned Judges of this Court has referred the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Indra Sawhney (supra) and has held that, 'this is clearly impermissible in view of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court. This being so, the reservation of 2% is hereby quashed and set aside.'

7. In view of the above Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and of this Court, the reservation to the extent of 2% for Economically Backward Classes made under Clause 4 of Appendix V of the Rules of 1984 is contrary to Article 15 of the Constitution and requires to be quashed and set-aside,

8. In the result, the petition is allowed with costs. Sub-clause (iv) of Clause 4(1) of Appendix V to the Rules of 1984, as amended under Government Notification dated 28th October, 1994, is quashed and set-aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Since the admission in question is that of 1994, in view of passage of time, no consequential orders are made.