ARVIND KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question for decision in this application,viz. CM. 6475/93 is as to whether the respondents 3 & 4. i.e. Directorate ofTraining and Technical Education and Government of the National CapitalRegion of Delhi can restrict the admission of 85 per cent of the jointseats to the students of Delhi to the Pharmacy Course in Maharaja SurajmalInstitute of Pharmacy, respondent No. 2, as provided in Clause 5 of theprospectus for the year 1983-84 for admission to Engineering and PharmacyCourses for Government/privately managed institutions, issued byrespondent No. 3.

(2.) S/s. Arvind Kumar and Satender Kumar have filed a petitionunder Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the respondents inwhich it has inter aha been pleaded that Clause (5) of the aforesaidprospectus, providing for reservation of 85 per cent of the seats for thestudents of Delhi, in the Institutions located in the National Capital Regionof Delhi for the year 1993-94 may be quashed, being ultra vires of Articles14, 15 (1) and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Maharaja Surajmal Institute of Pharmacy, respondent No. 2.(hereinafter referred to as the Institute), started diploma course in Pharmacyin July 1983. This Institute was recognised .by the Council of TechnicalEducation and is duly affiliated to the Board of Technical Education, Delhi,for the diploma Course.