KANTI LAL MEENA Vs. MAHARISHI DAYANAND SARASWATI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law referred to the larger Bench is as under :

(2.) The facts in short are that the petitioner sought admission to appear in Pre Teachers Education Test (for short "PTET") in the year 1999. These tests were conducted for the purpose of admission in various different Teachers Training Colleges for Bachelors Degree in Education. The petitioner was a member of Scheduled Tribe and he disclosed so in his application form and according to the petitioner, admission letter was also issued to the petitioner with specific note on the left top corner of the admission letter mentioning that it is for member of Scheduled Tribe.The result of the PTET was declared by the respondent-University and the petitioner was declared successful and according to the petitioner, in the category of Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner was permitted to take admission in Mahant Shree Raghunandan Dass Teachers Training College, Dungarpur. However, in the said admission letter, the petitioner was shown in the category of candidate of Dependent of Defence Personnel. The petitioner immediately contacted the officer- in-charge for the PTET, 1999 and the officer- in-charge of the PTET immediately made correction in the admission letter and his category was changed from candidate of Dependent of Defence Personnel to candidate in the category of Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner, then took admission in the College referred above at Dungarpur. The petitioner then deposited the fees and he started pursuing his studies allowed by the said College at Dungarpur. However, the petitioner and the said college received registered letter on 22-10-1999, whereby the officer-in-charge PTET, conveyed to the Principal of the said College of Dungarpur that if the petitioner does not produce the certificate of Dependent of Defence Personnel, his admission be cancelled. The petitioner then challenged the said action of the respondent by preferring S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4467/99. In said writ petition, the petitioner was allowed to continue the studies and, ultimately, the respondent's order, cancellation of admission of the petitioner, was quashed in the petitioner's Writ Petition No. 4467/99.

(3.) In the reply to the Writ Petition No. 4467/99, it was submitted by the respondents that the petitioner was otherwise not eligible for admission to the B. Ed. Course as the petitioner secured only 270 marks which was below the cut off marks in the category of Scheduled Tribe for the District Dungarpur whereas cut off marks for admission to B.Ed. College in the District of Dungarpur was 334. This Court in the petitioner's Writ Petition No. 4467/99 observed that if the petitioner is not otherwise qualified then the respondents will be free to take action against the petitioner on the said ground. The respondents then started proceedings for cancellation of the admission of the petitioner to the B. Ed. Course on the ground that in district- wise, the merit list prepared for the admission to the course of B. Ed., the petitioner was not eligible. Faced with this situation, the petitioner preferred this writ petition and stated that the merit list for the admission to the course of B. Ed. could have been prepared only state-wise and not district-wise. The petitioner's contention is that in other districts of the State of Rajasthan number of candidates have been given admission in the B. Ed. Course who secured less marks than the petitioner. Earlier the issue for admission to the B. Ed. Course came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mahavir Prasad Jangid v. State of Rajasthan & anr. and other 214 connected with petitions The Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 23-11-1987, held the District-wise preparation of the merit list for the purpose of grant of admission to the B. Ed. Colleges is just and legal and is not arbitrary or ultra vires.