VIKAS YADAV Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra, was authorised by the State of Haryana to make admission to B. Tech./B.E. Engineering besides in Architecture and Agriculture Courses for the year 1999-2000 in various colleges in the State of Haryana. Initially, the seats were 3200 but had been increased to 4100.

(2.) The petitioner belongs to Backward Class (B) Category and was eligible to appear in the Common Engineering Entrance Test as per qualifications laid down in the Brochure. The Common Engineering Entrance Test was taken on 26.5.1999. The petitioner was informed about his result and his rank of 8682. Admission Committee, Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra, respondent No. 4, advertised in various newspapers specifying the schedule of counselling for admission to academic session 1999-200. As per said advertisement which appeared in the Tribune. Instead of filling up the seats from the general category at the first instance, the seats from reserved categories were sought to be filled up thereby depriving the reserved category candidates from their right of consideration against general category seats which is not permissible in law. No such criteria had been prescribed in the prospectus. The effect of the same was that the candidates although belonging to Backward Class (B) category who were higher in merit would have been admitted in the quota of general category itself, but due to said advertisement, the concept of reservation had been defeated.

(3.) The petitioner's case is that, as per his information, the last candidate in the non-payment seat in Backward Class (B) category is at rank No. 7934. There are only 79 Backward Class (B) category candidates in between rank No. 7934 and 8682. Had the counselling of general category seats taken place prior to reserved categories seats, about 176 candidates from the Backward Class (B) category would have come in the first 2000 meritorious candidates. The petitioner would have been admitted to a free seat in Backward Class (B) category. Thus, according to the petitioner, the schedule of counselling as spelt out in the advertisement is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and violates his fundamental rights as well as Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.