SANGRAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. Pradip Tandon and others,', the Supreme Court held that the reservation in favour of candidates from rural areas is unconstitutional and the reservations for the hilly and Uttarakhand areas are severable and valid, as such, reservations for the hill and Uttarakhand areas are reservations within the meaning of Article 15 (4) of the Constitution implying thereby that reservations in favour of socially and economically backward classes of citizens. This view was also subsequently referred to approvingly in the case of Indra Sawhney and others vs. Union of India and others, (1992) Supp (3) SCC 217 and also in the case of Anil Kumar Gupta v. State of Uttar pradesh and others, (1995 (5) SCC 173 Surprisingly, the Government of Maharashtra slept over the issue of providing for reservations for hilly area residents for admission to professional courses like Health Sciences, Engineering and law, etc. in the Government run or Government Aided Private Colleges though such a reservation has been provided in D. Ed, admission. After about three decades, it issued a Resolution on 31st January 2002 providing for 20 per cent seats for hilly region of the western Ghats of 62 talukas and scarcity area residents, in respect of the admissions to be give in the newly started Government Medical College at Kolhapur for the academic year 2002-2003. In the current academies year, this 20 per cent reservation for the hilly area and scarcity affected area (HASA) at 20 per cent has been provided in the newly started three Government medical Colleges i. e. (1) Government Medical College at Latur, (2) Government Medical college at Kolhapur and (3) Government Medical College at Akola. These three medical colleges are in different region i. e. Government Medical college at Latur is in the Marathwada region, the Government Medical college at Akola is in the Vidarbha region and the Government Medical college at Kolhapur is for the rest of Maharashtra area. It is also pertinent to note at this stage that in the State of Maharashtra there are a government Engineering Colleges and 4 Government Aided Private Engineering Colleges and even in the current academic year no reservations have been provided for the hilly area or scarcity area affected residents for admissions to the four year degree courses in Engineering / Technology. Thus the State Government has done a half hearted exercise of providing reserved seats for HASA, that too, restricted only in the three newly started Government medical colleges.

(2.) THIS petition, filed under Article 228 of the Constitution, has challenged the validity of the Government decision to reserve 20 per cent seats for hilly area and scarcity affected area (HASA) only in the above named three Government Medical Colleges though the Government of maharashtra runs other 11 Government Medical Colleges and there are 4 medical colleges run by the Municipal Corporations of Mumbai and Thane and fully aided by the State Government. These reservations are set out in Rule 5. 5. 5. to 5. 5. 7. and the distribution of seats at these three Government Medical Colleges is set out in Rule 5. 8 to 5. 10 and thus, the constitutional validity of these rules is questioned by the petitioners. The said rules read as under: 5. 5. 5. Hilly Area and Scarcity Affected area (HASA) Residents, for rajarshree Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj Government Medical ' College, Kolhapur (Annexure-F ). 5. 5. 6. Hilly Area of Marathwada and Scarcity area from State of maharashtra for Govt. Medical College, Latur (Annexure - F ). 5. 5. 7. Hilly Area of Vidarbha and Scarcity area from State of maharashtra for Government Medical College, Akola (Annexure-F ). 5. 8 Distribution of seats at Govt. Medical College, Kolhapur: 5. 8. 1. Seats under Management quota. 15% the candidates applying for these seats are not required to appear for MH-CET 5. 8. 2. Residents of Hilly Region of Western Maharashtra and Scarcity 20% Area of Maharashtra (Annexure - "f") 20% 5. 8. 3. Rest of the Seats including seats at 5. 1. 65% 5. 9 Distribution of seats at Govt. Medical College, Latur: 5. 9. 1. Seats under Management quota the candidates 15% appling for these seats are not required to appear for MH-CET 5. 9. 2. Residents of Hilly Areas from Marathwada 20% region and Scarcity Area of Maharashtra (Annexure "f")5. 8. 3. Rest of the Seats including seats at 5. 1 65% 5. 10 Distribution of seats at Govt. Medical College, Akola : 5. 9. 1 Seats under Management quota the candidates 15% applying for these seats are not required to appear for MH-CET 5. 9. 2 Residents of Hilly Areas from Vidarbha Region and scarcity Area of Maharashtra (Annexure -"f" ) 20% 5. 8. 3 Rest of the Seats including seats at 5. 1 65% the seats at 5, 8, 5, 9 and 5. 10 shall be filled only when permission from all the concerned authorities is obtained.

(3.) THE petitioner himself is a resident of hilly area in Jalgaon district and belongs to Vimukta Jari category. In the MH-CET 2003, he has scored 150 out of 200 marks and in the State Merit List, he is at Serial No. 9852. He contends that one Miss Smita Dilip Naik, a resident of hilly area and belonging to Vimukta Jari categories, was at Sl. No. 10668 in the State Merit list and another candidate Shri Arvind Charankumar Chavan, a resident of hilly area and belonging to Vimukta Jati category, was at Sl. No. 10516, have been admitted by giving the benefit of reservation available to the hilly area (HA) though they had scored less marks than him in the Mh-CET 2003 and in the State Merit List were below him. If the area restriction as imposed in the impugned rules was not operated, the petitioner being higher in merit ought to have been admitted to the 1st Years of m. B. B. S. course in any of he Government Medical Colleges or in any of the three abovesaid Government Medical Colleges in the HA category. Thus, the area restriction imposed by the impugned rules for the hilly area residents have adversely affected him and the protection of equality guaranteed under Article 14 has been violated. It is also submitted that the guarantee of Article 15 (1) has been breached by imposing such area restrictions, and these restrictions are contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Nidamarti Maheshkumar v. State of maharashtra and others, AIR 1986 SC 1362 as well as Anil Kumar Gupta (supra), though the reservations in favour of hilly area residents are the reservations recognized under Article 15 (4) of the Constitution. The challenge to the impugned rules is two-folds namely ; (a) There cannot be a management quota in the Government medical colleges and such a concept is unknown to law. In any case, admission to any seat in such medical colleges must be from the list of MH-CET and the State Government has acted in breach of the settled law in this regard, (b) while reservations for the hilly area (HA) residents area permissible if restricted to about 3% overall, the reservation in favour of the scarcity area (SA) residents, are illegal and void ab initio, (c) while providing for such reservations in favour of hilly area residents, the choice of the students cannot be restricted to only three colleges when there are in all 14 Government Medical Colleges and 4 Government assisted Municipal Corporations' Medical Colleges, (d) the reservations so provided for the HA category ought to allow the students of this category to complete in the 30% State level and 70% regional level quota on merits on par with oppoutunities available to the OC, SC, ST and OBC, etc. category students and (e) provided reservation to the extent of 20 per cent in each of these three Government medical colleges in favour of the hilly area and scarcity affected area residents and excessive and glaring illegal and which Was disapproved in the case of Anilkumar Gupta (supra ).