BHAGAT RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider their claim for admission to Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) Course (hereinafter referred to as 'the Course') against the seats reserved for Ex-servicemen.

(2.) For admission to 1020 seats in the Course in various Colleges affiliated to Kurukshetra University, respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the University'), applications were invited from the eligible candidates through an advertisement. 1% of the seats were reserved for E.S.M and their wards. The petitioners applied to the said Course under E.S.M category. Entrance test was held on 1.7.2000. In the result declared, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 secured 127 and 132 marks and were placed at serial Nos. 68 and 44 in the merit list, respectively. They were asked to submit their admission forms accompanied by necessary documents upto 17.8.2000, as detailed in the Handbook of Information for admission to the Course (hereinafter referred to as 'the Prospectus') issued by the University. They were called for counselling on 3.9.2000. After the counselling, result of successful candidates for admission to the said Course was declared. Admission was denied to the petitioners because on the basis of the combined merit list of E.S.M/Wards of Ex-servicemen they were lower in merit as the last candidate who had applied for admission under the said category had obtained 138 marks. The grievance of the petitioners is that they were the only candidates claiming admission under the reserved category of Ex-servicemen and were entitled to admission out of six seats reserved for this category. Further, according to them, in terms of the Prospectus the respondents were unjustified in preparing a common list of E.S.M and wards of Ex-servicemen and granting admission to the candidates under this category on that basis.

(3.) On notice of motion to the respondents, they have contested the claim of the petitioners in the written statement Filed by them. It has been pleaded by them that 1% of the seats were reserved jointly for E.S.M. and their wards and as the last candidate admitted had obtained 138 marks, the petitioners have no claim to the reserved seat under this category. On these premises, they justified the denial of admission to the petitioners in the said Course.