PRADIP KUMAR BHAGAI Vs. INDIAN INSTITUTE TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ petitions are taken up analogously for hearing as subject matter is one and the same and both are covered by this judgment:.

(2.) I am dealing with the writ petition of In re : Pradip Kumar Bhagat and anr. The petitioner No. 1 is the father and the petitioner no. 2 is the daughter of petitioner no. 1 The prayer made in the writ petition is the admission of petitioner no. 2 in the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur (I. I. T.) in B. Tech. course commencing from July 1991 as she is eligible as per Brochure and Rules relating to the admission. The petitioner no. 2 Miss Anju Bhagat, appeared in All India Senior School Certificate Examination. 1991 of the central Board of Secondary Education) and secured 91% marks in Science subjects as required by Indian Institute of Technology. There was an advertisement by the Indian Institute of Technology. in "the Times of India" of 21st October. 1990 with regard to admission for me courses commencing from 1991 and the petitioner no. 2 duly applied to the Organizing Chairman. A communication was received by her from the Chairman to the effect that the direct admission was opened to Foreign Nationals residing in India or abroad and who are sponsored by the Government of India. The communication also gave out the requirements essential stating that the application should be sent to the Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi, or the Indian Embassy/ consulate of the respective country, the application form was to be accompanied by 70 US dollars or its equivalent. The petitioner no. 2 duly applied to the ministry of External Affairs as advised. Her application bearing "no. 0037 was duty approved by the said Ministry and forwarded to the I. I. T. The petitioners state that there are certain guidelines with regard to Direct admission of Foreign Nationals but where in the said guidelines it is mentioned that the student of a particular country cannot be admitted or discriminated with regard to the country whose students can be admitted. nor there is any scope of discrimination on ground of colour, creed or religion. However, when the list of students for admission was out it was found that petitioner no. 2 was not placed on the list and from enquiry it was revealed that she had not been granted admission because she was a foreign national (torn a developed country and the authorities have allowed students from underdeveloped or developing countries only. As America does not come within the criteria of under developed or developing country, Miss Bhagat's admission had been refused on that ground. Mr D. Jerath, the petitioners' learned Advocate, went to the Ministry of External Affairs on 1st July, 1991 and he was shown the list of admitted students, in which no student from America was declared admitted and on enquiry he was informed that only students from under-developed countries would be admitted. The petitioners alleged that refusal of admission to Miss Bhagat on the sole ground that she did not under-developed country is highly arbitrary because there is specification in the guidelines in the Brochure and, as such, such action is barred under the rule of promissory estoppel. It is further stated that if she is not allowed for admission it would not be possible for her to go to America for further studies because of her tender age and because of the fact that her parents are residing in India and also due to financial constraints and nonavailability of foreign exchange for American citizens. It is further alleged that the respondents are now altering their position by saying that the student from america or developed countries could not be granted admission in spite of the fact that they had not specified this earlier, The petitioners also pray for interim order for admission of the petitioner no. 2 in the B. Tech. course of the Indian institute of Technology.

(3.) THE respondents nos. l and 2 contested the writ application by filling the affidavit-in-Opposition. It is stated that admission of students in the Under graduate Course of Engineering/technology through Joint Entrance examination is held every year by the representatives of five Indian Institutes of Technology and the Institute of Technology, Banaras Hindu University, and a Joint Admission Committee is constituted. The Organizing Chairman of the indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, is the overall Co-ordinator of the admission. But it is stated that apart from the Joint Entrance Examination the said Committee has to select foreign nationals under the Direct Admission of foreign Nationals Quota earmarked and sponsored by the Ministry of External affairs of the Government of India. It is also stated that the said Joint admission Committee has virtually nothing to do with the matter of admission of foreign nationals save and except to scrutinize the applications forwarded to the Ministry of External Affairs, to prepare the merit list and to finally allocate seats strictly in accordance with the guidelines of the Government of india given from time to time. It is stated that the Brochure is published by the institute much in advance in order to enable the candidates to apply. The guidelines for sponsoring is circulated by the Government of India either along with the applications or immediately thereafter and the instructions of the government are mandatory and the Joint Admission Committee cannot act contrary to the same. The Affidavit sets out the guidelines of academic qualifications. It is stated in the Affidavit that the Ministry of External Affairs forwarded applications for Direct Admission of Foreign Nationals to the organizing Institute i. e. I. I. T. , Kharagpur, as follows : "for Developing countries 214 for Developed countries 21" developing countries. It is not understood why the petitioner No. 2 being a permanent resident of India at Ranchi and fairing well in the examination did not appear at the Joint Entrance Examination where the scope of selection was wide and instead adopted the devise of applying as Foreign Nationals for Direct admission. It is because of the fact that she being an Indian in all respect has kept her citizenship by birth intact as the USA citizen. The policy of the government of India is to give : first preference to the candidates from developing countries and thereafter to accommodate the candidates from developed countries. The Organising Chairman of the Under Graduate admission Committee, The Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, was advised by the Ministry of External Affairs by Memo dated 22nd March, 1991 that candidature of all the students holding developed countries' passports be considered only after all the eligible and deserving candidates from the developing countries have been accommodated. This instruction was repeated on 25th March, 1991. The policy was further spelt out by Memo dated 3rd March, 1991 addressed to the: Organizing Chairman, Indian Institute of technology. Kharagpur, by the Government of India relating to the admission of candidates for the year 1991-92. There it was specified to the effect that if any seat remained unfulfilled because of the non-availability of eligible students from developing countries or for any other reason, then those might be given to students from the developed countries on the basis of a combined merit list.