(1.) The question which this Public Interest Litigation poses is whether the Roster Point System adopted by the University of Delhi, through its policies and guidelines (which in turn are premised upon the notification and guidelines of the Central Government and the University Grants Commission) are arbitrary and deprive members of the SC, ST and OBC categories, fair representation in the various cadres of the colleges of the Delhi University as well as in the various levels of posts for which recruitment and promotion is resorted to within the University.
(2.) The University which has been impleaded along with other bodies objects to the maintainability of these proceedings contending that in an identical petition i.e. Delhi University SC/ST/OBC Teachers Forum & Anr. v. University of Delhi & Ors. this Court was approached contemporaneously along with the present petitioner (in W.P.(C) No.803/2014). That writ petition, according to the University, was dismissed on the ground that the writ petitioners in those proceedings lacked standing. The University's counsel points out that in holding that the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution were not maintainable, the Division Bench had previously relied upon and followed three decisions of the Supreme Court in Dr. Duryodhan Sahu v. Jitender Kumar Mishra, (1998) 7 SCC 273; B. Srinivasa Reddy v. Karnataka Urban Water Supply & Drainage Board Employees Assn., (2006) 11 SCC 731 and Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 1 SCC 590.
(3.) The Division Bench after citing the judgments noticed above, as well as others, stated as follows: