ONKAR DUTTA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bottom-line common questions of seminal importance that surface of determination in this bunch of writ petitions are two fold : firstly, whether the posts of Principal in Government Aided Private Degree Colleges/Post Graduate Colleges affiliated or associated under the provisions of the U.P. State Universities Act. 1973, can be subsumed within the sweep of the U.P. Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes. Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 (abbreviated to 'U.P. Reservation Act. 1994) and secondly, whether methodology adopted by the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission for screening out candidates, suffers from the taint of arbitrariness.

(2.) The reliefs recapitulated in substance, arc that the advertisement No. 25 of 1998, the selections made pursuant to the said advertisement, and the guidelines formulated by the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission, be quashed and the Commission be enjoined to re-advertise the posts sans applying there the rule of reservation as embodied in the U.P, Reservation Act. 1994 and prepare fresh guidelines for screening out the candidates taking into reckoning the qualifications as amended by the University Grants Commission.

(3.) Besides Sri R. B. Singhal and Sri R,C. Shukla, we have also heard Sarvsri R.C. Srivastava, R.N. Singh and Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocates appearing for petitioners in their respective cases and Sri Kripa Shanker Singh, standing counsel appearing for the State authorities. Sri H.R. Misra, standing counsel appearing for Higher Education Services Commission, and Sri Manish Goel appearing for the private respondents in one of these writ petitions. In re-application of the U.P. Reservation ACC. 1994