D.G. KANHERE Vs. REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF PUNE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE , returnable forthwith by consent of the parties. Leave to amend.

(2.) BY this petition, the petitioners challenge the advertisement dated 27th February, 1999 Issued by the Pune University advertising 85 posts of Teachers. By that advertisement, all the posts have been reserved for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, de -notified tribes, nomadic tribes and other backward class candidates. The Petitioners who according to them are eligible for these posts have challenged the advertisement on the ground that their right to apply for these posts which is guaranteed to them by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India has been denied because all the posts have been reserved for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, de -notified tribes, nomadic tribes and other backward class candidates whereas the petitioners do not belong to any of these categories. According to the petitioners, the reservation of all the posts advertised amounts to 100% reservation which is according to them violating the rights guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, in support of his contention, relies on a judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Indra Sawhney and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. : AIR1993SC477 and again a judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Post -Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh v. Faculty Association and Ors. : [1998]2SCR845 . In the submission of the learned counsel, the Supreme Court in both these judgments has clearly held that the carry forward rule cannot be applied to reserve 100% posts in a year in favour of the backward classes. The learned Counsel appearing for the University, on the other hand, relying on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Post -Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research v. K.L. Narasimhan and Anr. : AIR1997SC3687 submits that the Supreme Court in the above referred judgment has held that if the authority is filling in the posts as a special drive exclusively for the dalits and tribes, the rule that more than 50% posts cannot be reserved does not apply. The learned Counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand, points out that the judgment of the Supreme Court in Narasimhan's case has been set aside by the Supreme Court by its subsequent judgment in the Post -Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research's case referred above.

(3.) IN the result, therefore, the petition succeeds and is allowed, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer Clauses (a) and (b)(ii) which read thus: -