S R UJJANKOP Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the common question of law involved in these two petitions pertain to the validity of definition of rule 2(g) of the Karnataka engineering colleges and technical institute (selection of candidates for admission) rules, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules' for short).

(2.) a few facts which are necessary to dispose of these petitions are as follows: parents of the petitioners in both the petitions i.e., Sri s.r. ujjankop-the first petitioner in W.P. no. 12167 of 1989 and Sri a.r.k. sharma, father of petitioner in W.P. no. 12793 of 1989, were working in general reserve engineering force- and subsequent to 1987 they were discharged from service. Both the petitioners, on their completion of pre-university course, sought admission to first year engineering course, in the seats reserved by the government for ex-defence quota. On submitting their applications, the selection board viz., the director of technical education selected both the petitioners for admission to first year bachelor of engineering course for the academic year 1989-90. The duration of the abovesaid course is 4 years. Accordingly, the petitioner in W.P. no. 12167 of 1989 was informed that he has been allotted a seat in b.v.b. engineering college, hubli, and the petitioner in W.P. no. 12793 of 1989 was allotted a seat in bachelor of engineering course in basaveshwara engineering college, in bagalkot. On receipt of intimation both the petitioners approached their respective colleges with All the relevant certificates. But to their surprise both the abovesaid college authorities informed the petitioners that unless they produce a certificate issued by the sainik welfare board to the effect that their parents were part of ex-defence personnel, they will not be admitted. On such a demand, both the petitioners made attempts to secure the certificates, as directed, from the sainik welfare board. The sainik welfare board refused to issue certificates on the ground that parents of the petitioners served not in regular army but only in general reserve engineering force (gref) and therefore they cannot avail of such a benefit. Due to the stand taken by the sainik welfare board, the students had to lose their precious time. Accordingly, with great difficulty the petitioner in W.P. no. 12793 of 1989 got himself admitted to R.V.Engineering College, Bangalore by paying capitation fees, though he was initially admitted in basaveshwara college of engineering, bagalkot under quota reserved for 'ex-defence' personnel. Likewise, the second petitioner in W.P. no. 12167 of 1989 got herself admitted in gogte engineering college, belgaum, by paying capitation fees. Hence, both the petitioners filed two writ petitions separately seeking more or less similar reliefs:

(3.) subsequent to filing of these writ petitions, in view of the developments that took place, both the petitioners sought for Amendment of the prayer. When matter was taken up for arguments both the counsel submitted that since the students are nearing completion of their education career and the action of the respondents in not admitting both the petitioners was quite arbitrary and illegal, as such, whatever capitation fee paid by these two petitioners to their respective colleges be ordered to be refunded by the respondents, as according to the petitioners, had the respondents taken correct stand, they would have been admitted in the quota reserved for 'defence personnel' in which event they would not have been called upon to pay capitation fees and seek admission in private colleges.