SANJAY ARYA Vs. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Above Writ Petition Has Been Filed For A Writ Of Mandamus Forbearing THE Respondents From Restraining THE Petitioner From Writing THE Four Year B.E. Degree Course University Examinations Under THE Following Circumstances: THE Petitioner Claims To Belong To Barber Community Recognised As Backward Community In Rajasthan State And He Passed THE Plus Two Examination Conducted By THE Board Of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, In THE Year 1992 In Which He Claims To Have Obtained THE Following Marks In THE Subjects Indicated Below: English: 49/100 Maths: 76/100 Physics: 63/100 Chemistry: 60/100 It Is Also Claimed By THE Petitioner That He Obtained Distinction In THE Mathematics Subject. THE Petitioner Appears To Have Approached THE Fourth Respondent/Self-Financing College At Thanjavur In Tamil Nadu, Seeking For Admission To B.E. Degree Course As Against THE Seats Available Under THE Management Quota In THE Said Institution. On Being Satisfied, As It Is Claimed By THE Petitioner, Of THE Fact That THE Petitioner Satisfied THE Guidelines Issued For Such Admissions, THE Fourth Respondent Admitted THE Petitioner In THE First Year Of THE B.E. Degree Course As Against A Seat Available Under THE Management Quota In THE Said Institution. THE Petitioner Was Also Said To Have Paid THE Necessary Fees And Joined THE College And Underwent Instruction In THE First Year Of THE Course. As Was Obliged, THE Fourth Respondent Appears To Have Sent A List Of Candidates Who Had Been Admitted To THE Course In Question For THE Purpose Of Writing THE First Year Examinations During 1992-93 By A Communication Dated 17.4.1993 To THE Third Respondent/Controller Of Examinations, Of THE Second Respondent/University. While So, Just Before THE Commencement Of THE Examinations, THE Principal Was Said To Have Received A Communication From THE First Respondent That THE Admission Of THE Petitioner Was Not Approved, Since He Had Not Obtained THE Minimum Required 70 Per Cent Marks Prescribed By THE Government As THE Eligibility Marks For THE Admission Of Any Student To THE B.E. Degree Course In THE State In Professional Colleges, Both Aided Or Self-Financing, Or Government Institutions. In Spite Of THE College Authorities Pursuing THE Matter Before THE Higher Authorities, It Is Claimed That THE Second Respondent Rejected THE Admission Of THE Petitioner By Sending A Communication Dated 24.4.1993. It Is At That Stage, THE Petitioner Has Come Before This Court With A Request For THE Relief As Referred To Supra.

(2.) AT The Time Of Filing The Writ Petition, The Petitioner Also Filed W.M.P.No.15219 Of 1993 Seeking For An Injunction Restraining The Respondents From Preventing The Petitioner From Writing The University Examinations For The Fourth Year B.E. Degree Course Including The First Year Examinations Which Was Stated To Be Held On 27.5.1993 Or On Any Other Date, Pending Disposal Of The Writ Petition. A Learned Single Judge Of This Court, After Hearing The Petitioner, On Being Satisfied Of A Prima Facie Case In Favour Of The Petitioner, Issued A Direction On 27.5.1993, Directing The Respondents To Permit The Petitioner To Appear For The Examinations As Prayed For, With A Further Reservation That The Authorities Need Not Value The Papers Written By The Petitioner Until Further Orders. Notice Was Ordered To The Respondents And They Have Entered Appearance And Filed Counter-Affidavits Also.

(3.) ONE Of The Grounds Raised In The Affidavit And Urged At The Time Of Hearing Of The Writ Petition By Learned Counsel For The Petitioner Is That In Any Event, Inasmuch As The Petitioner Belonged To The Most Backward Class Viz., Barber Community, Which Is Recognised As Most Backward Throughout India, And Having Regard To The Fact That The Very Students Have Been Prescribed Only 65 Per Cent Minimum Marks In The Qualifying Examination For Admission Into The B.E. Degree Courses, The Admission To The Fourth Respondent/College Of The Petitioner, Who Has Obtained 66 Per Cent Marks In The Aggregate, Could Not Be Said To Be Bad In Law And, Therefore, The Action Taken By The Respondents To Interfere With The Admission Given To The Petitioner Is Opposed To Law.