SIMRANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Constitutional validity of one of the conditions of eligibility laid down by the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent-University') for admission to LL.B. Courses whereby benefit of reservation made for 'border area' candidates has been denied to those belonging to the district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur has been challenged in this writ petition.

(2.) In order to decide whether the impugned provision offends equality clause enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution, it will be useful to make a brief reference to the facts. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Gurdaspur. After having passed 12th class examination conducted by the Punjab School Education Board in the year 1996, the petitioner applied for appearing at the Entrance Test to be conducted by the respondent-University for admission to 5 years LL.B. Course. After having qualified the test, the petitioner was called for interview on 18.7.1996. During the course of interview, the petitioner's claim for admission against the seats reserved for 'border area' candidates was rejected on the ground that as per the University Calendar district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur have been excluded from the category of 'border area'. This provision has been challenged by the petitioner on the ground of discrimination and arbitrariness. The petitioner's assertion that the respondent-University has made an artificial classification between the candidates of district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur who seek admission to its courses and those who seek admission to Medical, Dental and Ayurvedic Courses. According to him, when the Government treats the candidates of district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur as belonging to border area for the purpose of admission to Medical, Dental and Ayurvedic Courses, there can be no rhyme or reason to deny the candidates of these two towns benefit of reservation made for 'border area' candidates for the purpose of admission to LL.B. and other similar Courses in which education is imparted by the respondent-University. Plea of estoppel has also been raised by the petitioner on the premise that after having allowed him to take the Entrance Test and having declared his result, the respondent- University cannot deprive him of the benefit of reservation meant for 'border area' candidates. The case set up by the respondent-University is that the policy of reservation for admission to various courses conducted by it in the teaching departments including the Regional Centre at Jalandhar has been approved by the Syndicate in the year 1991 after threadbare examination of various aspects and exclusion of the district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur from the definition of 'border area' is neither irrational nor unjustified. It is stated that Syndicate excluded the district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur from the category of 'border area' keeping in view adequate educational facilities available in these two townships.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the provisions of the Prospectus issued by the respondent-University for admission to the Faculty of Law as well as the Prospectus issued for the Common Entrance Test (PMT) for admission to MBBS/BDS/BAMS (Ayurvedacharya) Courses in the Government Medical/Dental Colleges of Punjab, Government Ayurvedic College, Patiala and Dayanand Medical College, Ludhiana and argued that if the candidates belonging to the district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur are entitled to the benefit of reservation meant for border area candidates for the purpose of admission to MBBS and other sister courses, there is no rhyme or reason to deny benefit of such reservation to similarly situated candidates for admission to LL.B. Courses. Learned counsel argued that Entrance Tests for medical and other courses are conducted by the respondent-University and, therefore, different conditions of eligibility cannot be prescribed for giving the benefit of reservation made in favour of border area candidates. Shri Pheruman further argued that once the Government of Punjab has declared district towns of Ferozepur and Gurdaspur to be border area towns on the premises that both these towns fall within 10 miles of the international border, the respondent-University has no jurisdiction to exclude these towns from the definition of border area and the candidates belonging to these towns cannot be denied the benefit of reservation for the purpose of admission to the courses conducted by the University. Learned counsel argued that distinction sought to be made between Ferozepur and Gurdaspur on the one hand and the other towns coming within the limit of 10 miles from the international border for the purpose of admission to the courses of the University is patently arbitrary and irrational and there is no relation between distinction sought to be made and the object of giving the benefit of reservation to the candidates belonging to the border area.