ASHISH GROVER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner - Ashish Grover has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying that the respondents be directed to grant admission to the petitioner in the government Poly-technic/institution for the year 1995-2000 against 15% quota reserved for the candidates, who were domicile/residents of Punjab, but have passed their qualifying examination i.e. matric from an institution located outside the Punjab.

(2.) The petitioner had passed his matric examination from C.B.S.E. Board from Shishu Niketan Senior Secondary Model School, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh. Thereupon, he appeared in the Joint entrance test 1999, which was held on 16th May, 1999 for various diploma courses available in different technical education and industrial training centres under the control of the Board or in government polytechnic. This joint entrance test is conducted for admission to 37 government and private institutions in the State of Punjab. On 7.7.1999, schedule for admission was published by the government. The petitioner got 406 marks with provisional rank 6263 in the joint entrance test. The petitioner was not able to get admission in any course and he approached the court on the averments that he satisfies all the eligibility conditions and is entitled to be considered for admission under 15% quota, as provided under clause 5 of the brochure. The respondents i.e. the Punjab State Board of Technical Education and Industrial Training as well as the other respondents opposed the claim of the petitioner. It was stated that the petitioner could not be considered under 85% quota and this had been duly clarified by the advertisement, the copy of which has been placed on record by the petitioner himself, as Annexure P-6. It was also averred that as per the practice of the Board they have given interpretation to clause 5 of the brochure that the candidates like the petitioner will always be placed under 85% quota of the said clause.

(3.) It may be noticed at the very out set that even earlier a petition was filed by the petitioner for the same relief being Civil Writ Petition No. 10673 of 1999, which was dismissed by the Division Bench, while giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition. The order of the Division Bench dated 4.8.1999 reads as under :-