Allowed

Sankalp Srivastava v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Jan 2023WP/12817/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition challenging Rule 5 of government admission rules that barred Overseas Citizens of India (OCI). The Court held the rule discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 15, allowing the petition based on a prior Division Bench judgment.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed; Rule 5 was declared illegal and discriminatory; OCI cardholders declared eligible for admission to government seats.

Sankalp Srivastava Vs the State of Karnataka — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 12817 OF 2019 (EDN-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SANKALP SRIVASTAVA MINOR, AGED 17 YEARS, S/o SANJEEV KUMAR, C1-301, L & T SOUTH CITY, AREKERE MICO LAYOUT, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 076. REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SRI SANJEEV KUMAR.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. AJOY KUMAR PATIL.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMITHRA R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶14

HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY SAMPIGE ROAD, 18^TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 012. REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.

¶16

THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER KARNATAKA EXAMINATIONS AUTHORITY, SAMPIGE ROAD, 18^TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 012.

¶17

¶18

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶19

THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF OVERSEAS INDIAN AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001.

¶20

THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DEHI - 110 001.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN.,AGA FOR R1, SRI. N.K. RAMESH., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3, SRI. SHASHIKANTH, ASG FOR R4 & R5, S.R. DODAWAD, CGC FOR R4 & R5)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT RULE 5 OF THE KARNATAKA SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNMENT SEATS IN PROFESSIONAL COURSES RULES, 2006 IN SO FAR AS IT STIPULATES THAT "NO CANDIDATE SHALL BE ELIGIBLE FOR ADMISSION TO GOVERNMENT SEATS UNLESS HE IS A CITIZEN OF INDIA" IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND VIOLATIVE OF THE PETITIONERS' FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT UNDER ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND STRIKE DOWN THE SAME;

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

¶26

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for grant of the following reliefs :

¶29

“1. To declare that Rule 5 of the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for admission to Government Seats in Professional Educational Institutions Rules, 2006 in so far as it stipulates that "No candidate is eligible for admission to Government seats unless he is a Citizen of India" is illegal, discriminatory, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 & 15 of the Constitution of India and strike down the same by issue of a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and ;

¶30

2) consequently, declare that the Petitioner is eligible and entitled to participate in the seat selection, allotment of seats and counseling process being conducted by the 2^nd Respondent Karnataka Examinations Authority and is entitled to choose and secure admission to B.E/B.Tech/B.Arch. Courses in Government and Private Aided and Unaided Engineering Colleges in the online counseling to be conducted by the 2^nd Respondent for the academic year 2019-20 on the basis of his merit and ranking in CET2019; and

¶31

¶32

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶33

The brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner is a

¶34

Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder who has been studying for the past more than 12 years in India and for the past seven years in Bengaluru and has completed his X & XII Standard Examinations from Bengaluru, Karnataka. The Petitioner was only born outside India but has been brought up in India and has studied throughout in India. The Central Government has conferred certain rights on OCI cardholders including the right to appear for All India Pre Medical Test and such other tests to make them eligible for admission on par with Indian Citizens. The 2nd Respondent KEA has issued the notification dated 31.01.2019 inviting applications for CET2019. The Petitioner is unable to register with KEA to appear for CET-2019 since the website of KEA does not permit him to register for CET-2019 on the ground that he is not eligible as he is not a citizen of India. Rule 5 of the Admission to Government Seats Rules provides that only citizens of India are eligible for Government seats. The same is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and in violation of the provisions of the Citizenship Act and the notifications issued by the Central

¶35

¶36

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶37

Government thereunder. The State legislature has also amended the definition of NRI in Section 2(n) of the Regulation of Admission Act by including the OCIs under the definition of NRIs. Hence the Petitioner has filed the above writ petition challenging the same and for appropriate directions to the Respondents.

¶38

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for respondent No.1, Sri N K Ramesh, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri K S Bheemaiah, learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4.

¶39

The petition pertains to admission of students of OCI in

¶40

the Government quota for the batches prior to 2021 more specifically the batches of 2017-18 and 2019-20.

¶41

It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that Rule 5 of the Admission Rules and clause 4(1) of the brochure at Annexure-B is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unreasonable, capricious and violative of Articles 14 and 15 of

¶42

the Constitution of India and the provisions of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’).

¶43

¶44

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶45

5.1 It is his further contention that the persons registered as OCI are eligible to appear for NEET-2017 and are also eligible for 15% All India Quota Medical seats. The other states like Kerala, Telangana and Maharashtra have held that OCI to be treated on par with Indian Citizens for the purpose of admission.

¶46

5.2 In view of the above, he contends that Rule 5 of the Admission Rules is illegal, discriminatory and arbitrary. Therefore, the same requires to be struck down. He further contends that Rule 5 of the Admission Rules is contrary to the provisions of the Indian Citizenship Act and Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. He also adds that the Central Government has amended the Citizenship Act and inserted Sections 7-A, 7- B, 7-C and 7-D by Act 6 of 2004 with effect from 03.12.2004 which is now being substituted by Act 1 of 2015 with effect from 06.01.2015.

¶47

5.3 The sum and substance of his arguments is that the persons registered as OCI under the Act have all the rights and are entitled to all benefits conferred on Indian Citizens and that the persons registered as OCI would have to be treated on par

¶48

¶49

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶50

with Indian Citizens for all practical purposes except for few limited purposes. He further contends that respondent No.3 has issued a Gazette Notification dated 05.01.2009 clearly stating that the persons registered as OCI under 7-A of the Act shall be entitled parity with NRIs to appear for the All India Pre-Medical Test or such other tests to make them eligible for admission in pursuance of the provisions contained in the relevant acts.

¶51

5.4 It is further contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the Division Bench of this Court in WP.No.27761/2019 (EDN-MED) C/w WA.No.1177/2019 (EDNRES) has dealt with this matter in detail, wherein the writ appeal has been preferred by the State against writ petition No.7376-78/2019 and writ petition has been preferred by similarly placed students belonging to OCI category who assailed Rule 5 of the Admission Rules insofar as it relates to the words ‘and includes persons of Indian origin and overseas citizen of India’.

¶52

The aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench is squarely applicable to the fact and circumstances of this case. Accordingly, this writ petition will have to be allowed in terms

¶53

¶54

WP No. 12817 of 2019

¶55

of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforestated matters.

¶56

In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed, in terms of judgment passed in WP.No.27761/2019 (EDN-MED) C/w WA.No.1177/2019 (EDN-RES).

¶57

Sd/JUDGE

¶58

¶59

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70