Dismissed

Mahima Kaul v. Union of India and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Aug 2009CWP/11449/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding admission to NIPER, the petitioner, a Kashmiri Migrant, claimed a reserved seat. The court rejected her plea, holding that the 10% relaxation is a weightage benefit, not an absolute admission right. Since the petitioner did not meet the minimum eligible marks after applying the relaxation, her application was rejected.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as the petitioner did not satisfy the minimum eligibility criteria for admission.

Mahima Kaul Vs Union of India and Anr. — Education and Admissions | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP. No. 11449 of 2009 Date of Decision: 20.8.2009.

Mahima Kaul

--Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others

¶7

--Respondents

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI.

¶9

Present:Mr. Suneet Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Ajay Kaushik, Advocate for respondent no.1.

¶11

Mr. K.K. Gupta, Advocate for respondent no.2.

¶12

¶13

PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL)

¶14

The petitioner belongs to the State of Jammu & Kashmir and is a migrant. Certificate dated 24.6.2009 (Annexure P-1) of her being a Kashmiri Migrant has been issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Delhi. The petitioner applied for admission to M.S. Pharma in response to the prospectus of the NIPER-JEE of 2009 under the Kashmiri Migrants category. The Information Brochure issued by the NIPER also contains provisions for reservation. Para 4 of the aforesaid brochure deals with the reservation including for Kashmiri Migrants. The relevant extract of the aforesaid para is reproduced hereunder:-

¶15

“ 4.1 Provisions for reservation shall be made as per Govt. of India rules in force.

¶16

4.4 Kashmiri Migrant candidates should furnish a valid migration certificate issued by the Relief Commission or any other competent authority.”

¶17

CWP. No. 11449 of 2009 -2-

¶18

In view of the above, the reservation is to be provided as notified by the Govt. of India rules in force. The Govt. of India had earlier issued the guidelines for reservation to be provided to Kashmiri Migrants vide Govt. of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Education letter dated 6.5.2000, wherein following provision has been made for reservation for the Kashmiri Migrants:-

¶19

“ 3. Through this letter, I seek your personal intervention in the matter to ensure that adequate concessions are granted to mitigate the problems of the Kashmiri Migrants relating to admissions in educational institutions. Specifically, the following concessions may be extended for admissions in schools and Under Graduate/Post Graduate Programmes in Universities for the wards of Kashmiris displaced from their homes:

¶20

Extension in date of admission (by about 30 days)

¶21

Relaxation in cut off percentage (subject to minimum eligibility requirements up to 10%).

¶22

Increase in intake capacity (up to 10%)

¶23

The State Governments may also positively consider provision of reservation for at least one seat in the merit quota in technical/professional institutions for the Kashmiri migrant students. The State of Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh have already taken a lead in this. Besides this, waiving of domicile requirement and facilitation of migration in second and subsequent years in higher education courses will also go a long way in providing some relief to this community.”

¶24

The aforesaid communication was followed with

¶25

supplementary guidelines, issued vide communication dated 13.7.001, the relevant extract thereof reads as under:-

¶26

CWP. No. 11449 of 2009

¶27

-3-

¶28

“ In this connection, the following clarifications are made:

¶29

(i) In non-technical/non-professional programmes, reservation of supernumerary seats upto a maximum of 5% of the total sanctioned seats may be made for Kashmri Migrants. Reservation applies both to UG and PG programmes.

¶30

(ii) As regards admission in technical/professional institutions, reservation of one seat is to be made in each institution and not in each course conducted by the institution.

¶31

(iii) Each institution should, therefore, call for applications from the Kashmiri Migrants and there should not be any discrimination between the migrants settled locally and those coming from outstation in the matter of their admission in a particular institution.

¶32

(iv) The reservation should be given to the most meritorious student amongst the applicants and he should be given admission to the course of his/her choice.

¶33

(v) In case, there is no seat available in a certain course, an additional seat may be sanctioned on supernumerary basis to accommodate the choice of the concerned student.”

¶34

Based upon the aforesaid guidelines the petitioner claimed the admission to the aforementioned course. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that one seat has to be provided to the Kashmiri Migrants in each institution and even if, there is no available seat in the discipline of the choice of the student, who opts for admission, an additional seat is to be created in the relevant discipline. In sum and substance the contention raised is a Kashmiri Migrant has to be granted admission under all situations in the discipline of his/her choice notwithstanding the

¶35

CWP. No. 11449 of 2009 -4-

¶36

availability of any seat in any course/institution.

¶37

On being put to notice, the NIPER has filed a detailed counter. The clear and categoric stand of the respondents is that the aforesaid instructions were later supplemented by fresh communication dated 8.3.2006 (AnnexureR-1). The relevant conditions are reproduced hereunder:-

¶38

“ 2. I would, therefore, request you to ensure that the following concessions are provided to the Kashmiri Migrant students in the matter of their admission in your institution during the academic session 2006-2007.

¶39

(i) Extension in date of admission by about 30 days.

¶40

(ii) Relaxation in cut-off percentage upto 10% subject to minimum eligibility requirement.

¶41

(iii) Increase in intake capacity upto 5%- course wise.

¶42

(iv) Reservation of at least one seat in merit quota in

¶43

technical/professional institutions.

¶44

(v) Waiving of domicile requirements.

¶45

(vi) Facilitation of migration in second and subsequent years.”

¶46

It is further averred in the reply that under the instructions, referred to herein above one seat has to be reserved in each institution for a Kashmiri Migrant, however, he/she must possess the minimum eligibility criteria as notified in the guidelines/instructions. In case of Kashmiri Migrants, he/she is entitled to relaxation in cut off percentage up to 10% subject to minimum eligibility. It is stated that the last selectee one Praveen Aggarwal with Roll No. 130407 was up to cutt off rank at 608. He secured 29.75 marks and by granting weightage up to 10% minimum required marks

¶47

-5-

¶48

CWP. No. 11449 of 2009

¶49

for admission for a Kashmiri Migrant comes to 26.78. However, the petitioner has secured only 13.25 marks and with rank 2936 and thus she is ineligible having not achieved the minimum prescribed percentage of marks. In so far the reservation of seats for Kashmiri Migrants is concerned, it is not in dispute.

¶50

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The forceful contention on behalf of the petitioner is that one seat has to be made available to the Kashmiri Migrant candidate notwithstanding his/her minimum cut off percentage.

¶51

According to learned counsel for the petitioner relaxation in cut off percentage up to 10% is an additional benefit to a Kashmiri Migrant and notwithstanding any percentage of marks, he/she has to be admitted against the reserved seat.

¶52

This argument does not impress me at all. The guidelines/instructions, referred to above clearly provide the reservation of a seat and certain other relaxations including extension in date of admission and relaxation in cut off percentage up to 10%. The guidelines have to be read in totality. No admission is permissible merely on the basis of reservation. The cut off percentage up to 10% which in other words is a weightage provided for a Kashmiri Migrant is the minimum eligibility under the guidelines. A person, who does not have the minimum criteria, cannot be extended the benefit of reservation. If, the contention of the petitioner is accepted that a Kashmiri Migrant has to be granted admission then in that situation a person with zero marks is entitled to the seat, which cannot be the intention of Govt. of India and does not seem to be so.

¶53

Since the petitioner does not possess the minimum eligibility criteria, no benefit can be granted to her. No merit petition dismissed.

¶54

(PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE

¶55

20.8.2009 lucky

Mahima Kaul v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahima Kaul v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Micky Samyal Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Swami Devi Dyal Hi Tech Education Adademy Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Gurdeep Singh and Ors. Vs Director, Rural Development & Panchayats & Anr.

Sukhninder Singh Vs Pec University of Technology, Chd.

Chhinder Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Gulyani and Anr. Vs Financial Commissioner Cum Pri. Secy. Haryana&Ors.