MEETKUMAR DINESHKUMAR PATEL Vs. GUJARAT UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Special Civil Application Is Filed Under Article 226 Of the Constitution of India, by the petitioners, who have completed their under- graduation i.e. Bachelor of Science in the field of Physics, have challenged the validity of Rule 10.2 of the Gujarat University Admission Rules, 2018 (Master of Science and P.G. Diploma) ('the Rules, 2018' for short) framed by the 1st respondent - University in exercise of powers under the provisions of Section 4 read with Section 22 of the Gujarat University Act, 1949 ('the Act, 1949' for short) and other consequential reliefs.

(2.) The petitioners have successfully completed Bachelor of Science (Under-graduate course) in the field of Physics from the 3rd respondent - College, which is autonomous institution, affiliated to 1st respondent - University. As such, they were qualified to seek admission to post graduate courses' offered by various aided and self financed institutions, which are affiliated to 1st respondent - University. Rule 10 of the Rules, 2018 referred above deal with distribution of seats among candidates of Gujarat University and other Universities. Rule 10 of the Rules, 2018 reads as under :-

(3.) As Stated In The Petition, Though The Petitioners Secured higher percentage then the cut off marks declared by 2nd respondent Admission Committee, they were shocked and surprised, as their names were not placed in the merit list. It is stated that on inquiry, they came to know that in view of restriction under Rule 10.2 of the Rules, 2018, separate cut off marks were declared for the students of 3rd respondent College. It is the case of the petitioners that they have completed their under-graduation course from the 3rd respondent -College, which is affiliated to 1st respondent - University, but by virtue of impugned Rule, their claim is restricted to only 5% of available seats. It is the case of the petitioners that there is no discernible difference between the students of 1st respondent University from other colleges and the 3rd respondent -College, which is autonomous college affiliated to 1st respondent - University. It is further stated that after completion of course they get degree from 1st respondent - University and restriction imposed in the impugned Rule is arbitrary and discriminatory amongst equals, as such, it violates rights guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is the case of the petitioners that all the students who have completed their course from affiliated colleges of 1st respondent - University constitute a class and classifying students of University from other affiliated colleges and that too of 3rd respondent - College is not based on intelligible differentia and same has no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved by such restriction. It is stated that 3rd respondent College was established in the year 1955 as grant in aid college. However, taking note of consistent and high quality of education provided by 3rd respondent College, the respondent No.1 - University in deliberation with University Grants Commission ('UGC' for short), acknowledged and granted the respondent No.3 College status of an autonomous college. It is the case of the petitioners that recognition of a college as an autonomous college merely offers liberty to the said institution to exercise autonomy on certain matters, but the parent University continues to exercise general supervision over such colleges. In that view of the matter, there is no justification for restricting entry only to 5% of available seats for the students who have passed undergraduate course from the 3rd respondent - College.