EDUCATE INDIA SOCIETY REGD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, is a non-profit unaided organisation set up with the objective of providing quality education to the general public in the field of engineering. The petitioner, accordingly, proposed to set up the college called the Institute of Technology & Management (hereinafter called 'the Institute'). Vide Annexure P-2 dated the 29th July, 1995, respondent No. 2 i.e. the Director of Technical Education, Haryana, conveyed to the petitioner permission of the State Government for the setting up of the Institute at Gurgaon, which would offer a four years degree course in Computer, Mechanical, Electronics and Communication Engineering, It was also provided that the Institute would get itself affiliated with the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak. This affiliation was also granted but later on shifted to the Guru Jambeshwar University, Hissar and subsequently reverted to the Maharshi Dayanand University. Vide Annexure P3 dated 18th July, 1996, the All India Council for Technical Education (hereinafter called the Council' accorded its conditional approval to the petitioner for the establishment of the Institute for the session 1996- 97 and it was stipulated, interalia that the admissions would be made to the various courses by a centralised agency in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Council and the Regulations issued vide notification dated 20th May, 1994 (Annexure R-1 with the reply; hereinafter called 'the Regulations'), which in turn had been framed under the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Unni Krishnan J.P. and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors., A.I.R. 1993 Supreme Court 2178. The Institute, accordingly, admitted students in terms of the Regulations inasmuch as that 50% of the total seats were offered as free seats and the remaining 50% as payment seats and that 50% of the total seats available in both these categories were to be filled in from amongst students belonging to the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes as provided by the instructions issued by the State Government. The admissions for the year 1996-97 and 1997-98 were, accordingly, made as per these guidelines. Vide letter dated 16th March, 1998, respondent No. 3, the Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra, which was the authorised body to make admissions for the session 1998-99, asked the Institute to furnish detailed information with regard to the courses that were being run; the fee that had been received and the reservation policy that was being followed while admitting students. The Institute, however, informed respondent No. 3 that from the ensuing academic session 1998-99, the reservation provided for the constitutionally permissible classes i.e. Scheduled Castes etc was being discontinued in accordance with the option left with the petitioner by Unni Krishnan's case (Supra) itself. Vide Annexure P-8 dated 1st April, 1998, respondent No. 3 asked the petitioner to supply a copy of the judgment in Unni Krishnan's case to respondent No. 1 - i.e. the State Government. This judgment was, accordingly, supplied to respondent. This judgment was, accordingly, supplied to respondent No. 1 on 8th April, 1998 and it was also intimated therein that respondent No. 3 be advised not to notify any reserved seat in the institute while publishing the Admission Brochure for that year. Vide Annexure P-10, a communication dated 10th April, 1998 addressed to respondent No. 1, the petitioner asked respondent No. 3 to supply a copy of the State Policy with regard to reservations and various reminders were also addressed by the respondents on this score. Respondent No. 3, nevertheless, on 10th July, 1998, issued a Admission Brochure for the session 1998-99 notifying that 76 out of the total 160 seats which were available in the Institute were to be filled in from amongst the reserved category candidates. A copy of the Admission Brochure has been attached as Annexure P-15 to the petition. The Institute vide its letter dated 10th July, 1998 Annexure P16 to the petition, conveyed its opposition to this proposal to respondent No. 2 and pointed out that as no policy had thus far been formulated with regard to the reserved seats for constitutionally permissible categories, admission, could not be made under those categories. As respondent No. 3 had nevertheless set the admission process in motion, the petitioner-society has come to this Court by way of this writ petition.

(2.) This petition came up for motion hearing on 31st July, 1998 and while issuing notice to the respondents, the Council was also impleaded as respondent No. 4 and by way of interim directions, it was ordered that the admissions be made to the reserved seats subject to further orders of this Court. The petition was, thereafter, admitted to regular hearing on 6th October, 1998 and after having been adjourned on a number of occasions, has come up for final disposal today.

(3.) On notice of motion, various replies have been filed on behalf of the respondents. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, the stand taken is that the Council which had been set up under All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (hereinafter called 'the Act') had notified a scheme under Sections 10 and 23 thereof which provided that while granting approval for the opening of a professional college (such as the Institute), the State Government policy for admission of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled tribes candidates had to be adhered to and that Clause 9(1) of the Regulations, gave an option to a private college to provide for reservation as per the Central Government Policy or the State Government Policy, whereas condition No. 8 of the General Conditions specifically provided that the State Government Policy for admission of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections, would be followed by the Institute. It has, accordingly, been pleaded that as a No Objection Certificate had been given by the State Government, approval and affiliation duly granted by the Council and the University respectively subject to Condition No. 8 aforementioned, the Institute could not deviate there from.