Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
RAJIV MITTAL
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28/11/1997
BENCH:
J.S. VERMA, B.N. KIRPAL, M. SRINIVASAN
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1997
Present:
Hon’ble the Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr.Justice B.N.Kirpal
Hon’ble Mr.Justice M.Srinivasan
Manoj Swarup, Adv. for the appellant
K.K. Mohan, Adv. for the Respondents.
J U D G M E N T
The following Judgment of the Court was delivered:
KIRPAL,J.
The question which arises for consideration in this
appeal relates to the admission to first year M.B.B.S.
course for the session 1996-97 to the Rohtak Medical
College, respondent No.2.
Seats in different medical colleges in the State of
Haryana are filled on the basis of M.B.B.S. entrance
examination. Rohtak Medical College, respondent No.2 is
affiliated to Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and for
the session 1996-97, it had 60 M.B.B.S. free seats to which
admission had to be made in the first year of the said
course. Out of this, 49 seats were to be filled from the
open category candidates while remaining 11 seats were
reserved for backward class candidates.
In the entrance examination, one Sunil Yadav, on the
basis of his marks, had secured position at serial No.1 in
the category of backward class quota while in the general
category, he had been placed at merit position No. 62. The
seats to the medical colleges are filled on the basis of
counselling where candidates are given option to select the
college where they want to study. This option is given to
the candidates whose names are arranged in the order of
merit.
On 9.9.1996, the first counselling for the 49 seats in
the open/general category was held. Sunil Yadav did not
secure any seat in the general category because of his low
merit position. On the following day i.e. 10.9.1996, Sunil
Yadav appeared for the first counselling for the reserved
seats as he had been placed at serial No. 1 in the category
of backward class. He naturally got selected and secured
admission to the M.B.B.S. course at the Rohtak Medical
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
College in the reserved category.
In after the first counselling, certain seats remain
unfilled, then second, third or fourth counselling, as the
need arise, takes place, inasmuch as few seats in the
general category had fallen vacant, second counselling was
held on 26.9.1996. Students upto serial No. 60 in the
aforesaid merit list were granted admission and there still
remained on seat in the general category which remained to
be filled. The candidates at merit list No. 61 did not join
the counselling, Sunil Yadav, who was at merit list No. 62
having already secured admission, also did not appear for
the counselling for the general category. Similarly,
candidates at Serial Nos. 63, 64 and 65 also did not join
for counselling. This seat was thereupon offered to the
appellant herein who was at serial No. 66. He accepted the
offer of admission and jointed the Rohtak Medical College.
Respondent No. 3 who belonged to the reserved category
could not get admission in the Rohtak Medical College
inasmuch as his merit position in the reserved category was
at serial No. 12 while the number of seats in this category
in that college were only 11 and all those seats had been
filled. He thereupon filed a writ petition in the Punjab &
Haryana High Court contending that Sunil Yadav should have
been adjusted against the general category seat, which had
been allotted to the appellant herein in the second
counselling held on 26.9.1996, and if this is done, one seat
in the reserved category would fall vacant which would
naturally fall to respondent No. 3.
On behalf of the respondent No. 1, the stand taken was
that Sunil Yadav could not be considered in the first
counselling in the open category because he did not fall
among those open category candidates who had been given
admission against 49 open category seats. Candidates upto
merit position 53 had been offered admission against these
seats at the time of first counselling. Thereupon, Sunil
Yadav was called for first counselling for reserved seats
and was granted admission against the backward category
quota. He having thus secured the seat, lost his claim for
open category and, therefore did not attend these second
counselling which was held on 26.9.1996.
The High Court, allowed the writ petition filed by
respondent No. 3 as it held that it was "settled principle
of law that a candidate from the reserved class, if is
entitled to get admission to a course of his own merit in
the general list, he must be treated on his merit and not
accommodated against the reserved vacancy". It thereupon
came to the conclusion that Sunil Yadav should have been
adjusted against the one seat in the general category which
had been offered to the appellant at the time of second
counselling and that the reserved seat, which would be so
vacating by Sunil Yadav, should be offered and admission
granted to respondent No. 3, It however, directed that the
seat was occupied by respondent in the Medical College,
Agroha, Hissar, Haryana should be given to the appellant
herein and writ petitioner should be shifted to the seat
which was occupied by the appellant herein in the Medical
College at Rohtak. It may be noticed that respondent No.3
had already secured admission at Medical College, Agroha
Hissar, Haryana but he wanted to shift to the Medical
College, Rohtak just as the appellant herein had already
secured a admission in another medical college and he too
wanted to shift to the Rohtak Medical College.
On behalf of the appellant, it has been contended that
the High Court not direct that Sunil Yadav should be
considered as having been given the general category seat in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
the second counselling when he had already secured admission
in the first counselling in the reserved category. on the
other had, the respondents have relied on the judgment of
the High Court and in particular Note 2 of the Information
Brochure and contended that Sunil Yadav could only be
adjusted against the open category seat and he could not be
considered for the reserved category.
In our opinion, the High Court erred in allowing the
writ petition and directing that the admission, which had
been granted to the appellant, should be cancelled. The
system of counselling for the purpose of granting admission
to the various medical colleges in the State is now regarded
as mot equitable one where options are given of various
seats to the students in accordance with their overall merit
position in the combined entrance examination, which
examination is competitive in nature.
If as a result of first counselling, all the seats,
which are available, are filled then no further counselling
takes place. Where however some seats become available, then
it appears that second, third of if then need arise, fourth
counselling does take place but in such a manner that
normally there should be no delay in the commencement of the
course of study. Further more unless and until counselling
takes place, no candidate who has been granted admission on
the basis of the counselling, is allowed to change his
college merely because a seat in another college has fallen
vacant. The seats, if any, which fall vacant, can only be
filled if and when counselling takes place where the
candidates who have already been selected my have an option
of shifting to another college. An appropriate analogy of
this system is that of booking chart for a dramatic
performance which has to take place in the future. The
peoples standing in the queue reserve or book their seats
out of those which are available according to their
preference. Once the chart fills up the booking closes. Only
sometimes, if tickets are returned they may be reissued.
But once the dramatic performance starts no one is allowed
to enter. Just as counselling for seats to medical colleges
must stop once the course of study commence.
The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that
Sunil Yadav could only be considered as a general category
candidate and placed reliance on the observations of this
Court in Indra Sawhney & Ors. Vs. Union of India 1992 Supp
(3) SCC 212 where at page 735, it was observed as follows:
"In this connection it is well to
remember that the reservations
under Article 14(4) do not operate
like a communal reservation. It may
well happen that some members
belonging to, say Scheduled Castes
get selected in the open
competition field on the basis of
their own merit; they will not be
counted against the quota reserved
for Scheduled Castes; they will be
treated as open competition
candidates."
The aforesaid principles has, apparently, been
incorporated in Note 2 in the Information Brochure of the
Maharshi Dayanand University Rohtak which reads as follows:
"A candidate who applies either for
reserved category or for both
reserved and open will be
considered first in open category.
In case he/she is not selected in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
open category, he/she will be
considered for reserved category."
The aforesaid Note 2 has been constructed by the High
Court to mean that Sunil Yadav who was also in the merit
list for the seat in the open category should be considered
as having been selected to the open category seat and he
should not be considered as having been selected for the
reserved category seat.
The aforesaid Note 2 has not been correctly construed
by the High Court. This note, in a case like the present,
will have application only when a reserved category
candidates is in a position to secure, and secures admission
to a seat in the general in the same counselling in which
seat is available to him in the reserved category. It is for
this reason that the first counselling for the general
category candidates was held on 9.9.1996 while the first
counselling for the reserved category candidates was held on
10.9.1986. In other words the first counselling was spread
over two days so that if any reserved category student had
managed to secure admission to the general category seat
then will not be entitled to adjustment against the reserved
seat. Had Sunil Yadav secured admission to any one of the 49
seats in the first counselling held on 9.9.96, then could
not have been called or considered for admission against any
of the 11 reserved seats in the counselling which was held
for the backward class candidates on 10.9.1996. As Sunil
Yadav’s position in the open category was at serial number
62 and the last candidate who had secured admission at the
first counselling against the 40th seat was at serial No.
53, therefore, having ailed to secure admission on 9.9.1996,
Sunil Yadav was rightly allowed to take part on the second
day of the first counselling for the backward class
candidates which was held on 10.9.1996. It is in that
counselling that he was selected and granted admission to
the Medical College at Rohtak. Once Sunil Yadav has secured
admission in the reserved category quota at the first
counselling, there would be no occasion for him to take part
in the second counselling for the general category seat for
the same college which held on 26.9.1996. The seat which had
fallen vacant was one of the 49 seats which was required to
be filled by the general category candidates. As the
aforesaid Note 2 was not applicable to a case like the
present, where Sunil Yadav having failed to secure admission
to a seat in the open category in the first counselling for
that category but had secured admission to there served seat
in the same counselling, the question of his being shifted
or being regarded as a candidate to the open category seat
which had become available only after he had secured
admission did not and could not arise and, consequently, the
appellant was rightly granted admission to the general
category seat in the Rohtak Medical College.
For the aforesaid reasons, we allow the appeal and set
aside the Judgment of the High Court, the result of which
would be that the writ petition filed by the respondent No.
3 before the High Court would stand dismissed. There will be
no order as to costs.