SANWARIYA SARKAR JHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in this writ application has prayed for the issuance of a mandamus commanding upon the respondents to admit the petitioner to the B.Ed. Course for the Sessions 2008 -09 at the A.S. Mahavidyalaya, Deoghar, which is a constituent college of the Sidhu Kanhu University, Dumka, against vacant general seats/unfilled reserved seats.

(2.) THE petitioner had appeared at the competitive test which was held by the respondent college for selection of candidates for admission to the B.Ed. courses in the College. By the first merit list published on 9.8.2008, the petitioner was declared successful and was placed at serial No. 8 in the merit list against the subject of Hindi. He received a letter from the respondent college asking him to deposit the requisite fees and other documents for admission to the aforesaid course in between 12.8.2008 to 20.8.2008. A notice was published by the college on 14.8.2008 cancelling the merit list published on 9.8.2008. Subsequently, by letter dated 24.8.2008, the respondent University intimated the petitioner that his selection for the session 2008 -09 has been cancelled as per the direction of the University since the vacancies have been kept reserved for the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates. A second merit list was thereafter published by the College. The petitioner learnt that two general category candidates did not take admission and as such two seats in the General Category remained vacant. Later, one of the seats was filled up by one Sudha Kumar Mishra whose name had figured at Serial No. 7 of the merit list. The petitioner also learnt that the seats reserved for SC/ST candidates were also vacant on account of non availability of candidates in the said categories. The grievance of the petitioner is that instead of filling up the single vacant seat of General Category by allowing admission to the petitioner and instead of filling up the vacant reserved seats by his admission from the selected candidates of General Category, the respondent authorities have illegally and arbitrarily denied the petitioner's claim for admission to the course.

(3.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents. Sri Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the respondents action of cancelling the merit list published on 9.8.2008 as being illegal and mala fide. The learned Counsel submits that when even according to the 2nd merit list, two general seats remained vacant on account of the general candidates above the petitioner not opting for admission and after having filled up one vacancy by admission of the candidate named above the petitioner in the merit list, the petitioner was the only candidate whose name had figured immediately after the last candidate placed at Sl. No. 7 of the list and the petitioner should have been given admission, but instead of doing so, the respondents have been attempting to allot the seat arbitrarily to some candidates of their choice. Learned Counsel argues further that even as per the settled principles of law as declared by the Supreme Court in several cases, if seats in reserved categories remain unfilled in absence of candidates belonging to reserved SC/ST/OBC categories, then such vacant seats have to be transferred to General Category and filled up accordingly. Leaned Counsel submits that instead of applying the aforesaid principles of law and allotting seat of the General Category and even unfilled reserved candidates to the petitioner, the respondents have been trying to divert the same in favour of candidates of their choice by illegally cancelling the petitioner's selection for admission to the Course.