KUMARI ARUNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the following important question of law arises for consideration

(2.) The facts of the case are as follows : The petitioner passed the Pre-University examination held by the Board of Pre-University Education of this State in April 1984. She secured 84 per cent marks in the optional group. She applied to the 2nd respondent selection committee constituted by the State Government for the purpose of making selection for admission to the medical course in respect of seats in Government Medical Colleges and in respect of Government seats in private medical colleges. She also appeared for the Entrance test conducted by the State Government for the purpose of ascertaining the merit of the candidates for making the selection. At that test the petitioner secured 985th rank. On the basis of the rank in the entrance test, she could not get a seat out of the seats available for open competition. She, however, claimed selection against one of the seats reserved for backward classes in terms of the Government order on two grounds.

(3.) The plea of the petitioner in support of the claim is as follows : From 1973-74 till date the income of the father of the petitioner was less than Rs. 10,000/-. It was Rs. 8,200/- for the year 1973-74, Rs. 7720/- for the year 1981-82 Rs. 7818/- for the year 1982-83, Rs. 8,012/-for the year 1983 and Rs. 8,200/- for the year 1984-85. Therefore the selection committee was in error in holding that the income of the father of the petitioner was more than Rs. 10,000/-. The petitioner has also produced all the Income-tax returns for the years 1981-82 to 1984-85. The statement of income for these years as produced by the petitioner is as follows : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_196_AIR(KAR)_1985Html1.htm</FRM> Learned counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the above facts and figures submitted as follows: No doubt the gross receipts of the father of the petitioner exceeded Rs. 10,000/- during all the above years, but the gross receipt was no income. In respect of a person carrying on a profession the income has to be ascertained after making necessary deduction or allowance necessary for earning the income and the remaining amount alone constitutes income in the real sense of the term. After such, computation, the income of the father of the petitioner was less than Rs. 10,000/- all these years as established by the assessment orders. Therefore the rejection of her claim by the selection committee was erroneous.