CHUNDURI KALYANI CHOWDARY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the writ petitioners, precisely, as advocated by the learned Senior Counsel, Sri Ghanta Rama Rao, appearing for Sri Kambhampati Ramesh Babu, Sri G.Venkata Reddy and Sri K.S.Murthy, appearing for the writ petitioners in all these Writ Petitions, is "contrary to constitutional mandate, as prescribed in Clause (6) of Article 15, vide the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019, the respondent-authorities are allotting the seats in EWS quota also to the classes mentioned in Clauses (4) and (5) of Article 15 of the Constitution."

(2.) On the other hand, it is the submission of the learned Advocate General appearing for the State of Andhra Pradesh, learned Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the Union of India and the learned Standing Counsel for the Medical Council of India, Sri Vivek Chandrasekhar, that the contention to the above said effect, having regard to the ground realities, is far from truth and is incorrect and no allotment of seats to the reserved categories under Clauses (4) and (5) of Article 15 of the Constitution is being undertaken in the 10% additional quota meant for EWS. It is their uniform further submission that the allotment of seats, as indicated in page 15 of W.P. No.11583 of 2019, includes not only 10% meant for EWS but also the seats additionally sanctioned to maintain the required percentage for which reserved categories are entitled in view of the hike in the number of seats. In order to substantiate the said stand, they rely on various proceedings/ orders issued by the Union of India and the State Government.

(3.) In order to examine the said issues, it would be highly essential to refer to the provisions of the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019, dated 12.01.2019, which read as under: