IQBAL AHMED Vs. PUNJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed for issue of a mandamus to the respondents to admit the petitioner in L.L.B Course against the quota of backward class candidates.

(2.) The writ petition was admitted on 30.9.1993 after notice to the respondents at the same time the Court directed the respondents to grant provisional admission to the petitioner with a condition that the same shall be subject to the final decision of the writ petition. Thereafter, vide order dated 16.5.1995, a learned single Judge of this Court directed the respondents to issue roll number to the petitioner and to permit him to appear in L.L.B. IInd year examination commencing from March 17, 1995. In Civil Miscellaneous application No. 10039 of 1995, the petitioner has stated that after having passed in LLB Ist year examination, he had been admitted to LL.B IInd year examination under the directions of the Court. The petitioner has further stated that his result has not been declared so far due to the pendency of the case. When this application came up for consideration before the Court on 17.10.1995, Shri G.R.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, accepted notice. The Court directed that the parties should come prepared for final arguments on the main writ petition. It is in this manner that the writ petition has been taken up for final hearing.

(3.) The petitioner applied for admission to LLB Course to the Punjab University, Patiala for the year 1993-94. For the purpose of this admission, the University conducted an entrance test. The petitioner passed the test and his name was placed at Sr. No. 238 in the merit list prepared by the University. The petitioner had applied against the category of backward classes in the morning session and according to him, against the seats reserved for backward classes candidates, he had a right to be admitted because the students who were placed at Sr. No. 1 & 2 in merit list were given admission against four seats reserved for morning session. According to the petitioner, he was called for interview by the University and was directed to produce backward class certificate. The petitioner submitted that he compiled with the aforesaid direction given by the University but respondent No. 3 insisted on production of a backward class certificate duly attested by the Tehsildar/Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil). The petitioner further submitted that P.C.S. Officers and the Tehsildars in the State of Punjab were on strike in August, 1993 and although he made attempt to get backward class certificate from these authorities, his efforts proved futile and he could secure certificate from the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Malerkotla showing that the petitioner has stated that he had also filed an affidavit dated 8.6.1993 to prove his claim that he belongs to backward class. The petitioner has further contended that denial of admission to him against the seats reserved for backward class candidates is arbitrary and unfair.