MADHA ENGINEERING COLLEGE Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Appeal are directed against the common judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in a batch of Writ Petitions. The challenge in these Petitions is to the constitutional validity of some of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Admission in Professional Educational Institutions Act, 2006 (Act No.3 of 2007) (for short 'the Act'), and the consequential Government Order Nos. 115 and 87 dated 25-05-2007 and 16-03-2007 respectively issued in pursuance of the Act. The writ petitioners are the unaided minority and non-minority professional colleges and the Consortium of Self Financing Professional, Arts & Science Colleges. The main ground of attack in the Writ Petitions is that the provisions of the Act are violative of the petitioners'fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(g) and 30 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE factual matrix of the matter may be noticed first. From the year 1993-94 till the year 2002-03, admissions to self-financing Medical and Engineering Colleges were made on the basis of the scheme framed by the Supreme Court in the judgment reported in Unnikrishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1993 (4) SCC 111. Subsequently, in T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka , 2002 (5) CTC 201 : 2002 (8) SCC 481 , a 11 Judge Bench ruled that the decision in Unnikrishnan's case insofar as it framed the scheme relating to the admission and fixation of fee was unconstitutional. THE scheme framed in the said decision and the consequential directions given by the various authorities were overruled. THE Supreme Court in the said case further ruled that the minorities, as well as the non-minorities have a right to establish and administer educational institutions which are referable to Articles 30, 19 and 26 of the Constitution of India respectively, and the said right to establish and administer includes the right to admit students. By the said judgment, the Supreme Court recognized the autonomy of the unaided private institutions in the matter of governing admissions and held such institutions cannot be deprived of their right to select students, subject to adhering to the merit based selection.

(3.) IT is necessary to mention at this stage that the self-financing medical colleges without prejudice to their rights recognized in T.M.A. Pai case and P.A. Inamdar case offered 50% of the total seats in their institutions for the academic year 2006-07 for allotment by the Government under single window system. IT seems that thereafter the Managements of the Institutions agreed to enhance the said quota to 65% and the remaining 35% were to be filled up by the medical colleges on multiple window basis.