B KALADHAR Vs. GOVT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) While most of the principles relating to Hindu Law were decided in the cases which arose under the Income Tax Act, those relating to reservation of seats in educational institutions fall for consideration mostly in cases involving admission into post-graduate and under-graduate medical courses. With new categories of reservation being added year after year, to the existing ones, the matter is yet to reach finality. In the State of Andhra Pradesh, in addition to providing reservations under Article 15 (4) of the Constitution of India, those in favour of physically handicapped candidates, service candidates and women, the State is under obligation to ensure reservation as per the orders issued in exercise of power under Article 371-D of the Constitution of India, in favour of local candidates. Working out these reservations, some vertical, some horizontal, and yet others, in a way, diagonal, naturally poses the problems inherent in it. The importance and primacy of the courses naturally force the aggrieved candidates to approach the Courts.

(2.) For the current academic year, the process of admission into post-graduate medical courses into the institutions in the State commenced with the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.44, HM & FW (E2) Department, dated 25-02-2005. One salient feature of this G.O. was that, it provided for arrangement of all the post-graduate courses in alphabetical order. Thereafter, the colleges, in which the courses were available, were required to be arranged in alphabetic order, separately, for the three University areas, representing three parts of the State. Against the seats so arranged, the roster points were required to be indicated. Out of every 7-points in the list, 6 were to be earmarked for local candidates and the 7th was to be treated as unreserved. This measure was resorted to, as a compliance with the Presidential Order issued under Article 371-D of the Constitution of India. The entire exercise was called as "seat matrix". It is not necessary to refer to the other aspects of the G.O.

(3.) Complaining that the method of reservation provided for in the matter of implementation of the Presidential Orderwas not proper, and pointing out certain other defects, a batch of writ petitions was filed before this Court. A Division Bench, which initially heard the same, felt it proper that the matter be heard by a Full Bench, since interpretation of several judgments and provisions was involved. Thereafter, a Full Bench heard the batch and rendered its judgment in Md. Abdul Azeez Asad v. State of A.P. The procedure adopted in G.O.Ms.No.44, dated 25-02-2005 for implementation of the Presidential Order was held to be illegal and unconstitutional. The reservations that were provided for, in favour of physically handicapped candidates and women under the said G.O. were found to be in order. Other questions, that were raised before it, were left open.