L JAYASREE Vs. CONVENOR EAMCET 98 JNTU HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions relate to the admissions made for the Engineering Course under EAMCET, 98 for the academic year 1998-99 against the seats reserved for NCC category. The main question which arises for consideration is whether NCC certificates obtained after passing of the qualifying examination i.e., Intermediate can be taken into consideration or not for the purpose of making admissions into the Engineering Course under the NCC quota.

(2.) According to the petitioners, qualifying examination is the relevant date for examining the eligibility of the candidates for admission and any certificates obtained or qualifications acquired subsequently cannot be taken into account. According to them, NCC "A" and "B" certificates only can be obtained at the Intermediate level and "C" certificate can be obtained only after completion of Intermediate. So "C" certificate holders cannot be considered and they are not entitled for any preference over "A" and "B" certificate-holders. If "C" certificate-holders are also taken into consideration, it amounts to treating unequal equally and leads to discrimination offending Article 14 of the Constitution.

(3.) The question raised, however, is no longer res Integra as it is concluded by, at least, three judgments of this Court viz., (1) Sarath Prabhakar v. State Road of Technical Education, 1996 (1) ALT 636, which is rendered by a Division Bench, (2) the unreported judgment of a learned single Judge in WP Nos. 17560 and 15615 of 1993 dated 4-3-1994 and (3) another judgment of a learned single Judge reported in M. Subhas Reddy v. University of Health Sciences, 1997 (3) ALD 343. In all these three judgments, after repelling similar contentions which were raised there also, this Court held that NCC "C" certificates obtained after the qualifying examination also can be taken into consideration and that "C" certificate-holders are entitled to preference over "A" and "B" certificate-holders for the purpose of admission. I am not impressed with the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the judgments 1 and 3 cited above haw no application to the cases on hand since the first judgment dealt with ECET examination and the third judgment dealt with admission to MBBS Course which are governed by different sets of rules and that, in any case, the said judgments require reconsideration. The mere fact that those cases related to ECET and MBBS does not make any difference so far as the principle laid down is concerned. I am bound by the said judgments and I do not see any valid grounds either to take a different view of to refer these cases to a Division Bench for reconsideration of the said judgments. After all, the object of EAMCET or any other entrance examination is to select the best among the eligible candidates for admission based on merit. When candidates with superior qualifications and merit are available, they cannot be passed over on some imaginary grounds of discrimination. Even Article 14 of the Constitution does not forbid reasonable classification based on qualifications and merit. That apart, according to Rule 8(4Xc) of the Rules issued in G.O. Ms. No.l 84 Education (EC-2) dated 20-8-1993, the priorities in respect of the categories mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of the said rule shall be as declared by the Government. The priorities for admission into the Engineering Colleges under the NCC category were fixed by the Government in G.O Ms. No. 194 dated 26-8-1993. According to the said priorities fixed by the Government, holders of NCC "C" certificate are entitled to priority over "B" and "A" certificate holders. I do not, therefore, find any illegality in the action of the respondents in giving preference to "C" certificate holders in the matter of admissions over "B" and "A" certificate holders.