Summary
The State Government of Tamil Nadu reserved three seats for the category 'eminent sportsmen' for admission to the
MBBS Course for 1986-87 in the Government Medical Colleges.Category (iii) in Annexure I to the prospectus indicated their order of preference as participation at (a) Interna- tional level, (b) National level, and (c) State level.Candidates securing 50 per cent aggregate marks in science subjects in the qualifying examination were made eligible.The Selection Committee adopted participation at the nation- al level to be the criterion and selected three candidates on the basis of merit in the qualifying examination. Four candidates were placed in the waiting list in order of merit. The petitioner who was next in order of merit and could not be selected, filed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution assailing the select however, struck down the selection of respondent No. 6 placed third in the select list since he had actually not played at the national level, and directed the Selection Committee to fill up the vacancy from the waiting list and go by the order of merit. Dismiss- ing the appeal by the petitioner the Division Bench held that the decision of the Selection Committee was reached bona fide on the basis of academic merit and that it was not just and proper that the respondent No. 6 should lose his seat in the medical college for no fault of his but at the instance of the petitioner who stood no chance compared to the other candidates in the waiting list.In this special leave petition, it was contended for the petitioner that the only criterion for selection was pre- eminence in sports and not 1050academic excellence, and that the Division Bench was in error in not sustaining the order of the Single Judge set- ting aside the selection of respondent No. 6, who had played in the Zonal tournament which was not of national level.Dismissing the special leave petition,HELD: 1. All that Category (iii) does is to lay down a rule of preference. A candidate who had participated at international level would exclude a candidate participating at National level and a person who had participated at National level would exclude a person participating at State level. There are no guidelines provided for determination of comparative eminence as between candidates belonging to the same class, e.g. at National level. Nor does it provide for any guidelines by which the choice has to be made between the candidates who have excelled in a particular field of sports, e.g. acquatics, or when there is more than one candidate who have excelled in their respective fields of sports e.g. cricket, football, hockey etc. and the number of seats reserved are less than the candidates found eligible.All of them being more or less equal, the best method is to go by marks obtained at the qualifying examination. The selection must, therefore, necessarily depend upon their academic merits. If the adjudging of comparative merit amount the eligible candidates is left to the discretion of the Executive that would necessarily introduce an element of subjectivity, which would introduce arbitrariness. [1055B-F]2. It is not obligatory for the Court to interfere in all cases unless justice of the case so demands. In the instant case the High Court was entitled to take the view that the Court ought not to, in the facts and circumstances of the case, exercise its discretionary powers under Art.226 of the Constitution at the instance of the petitioner who was not entitled to any relief. Any other view would have been manifestly unjust. [1056C-D]See the full content of this document
Extract
Khalid Hussain (Minor), Representedby Father Dr. Akthar Hus VS. Commissioner & Secretary To Government Oftamil Nadu, Health
PETITIONER: KHALID HUSSAIN (MINOR), REPRESENTEDBY FATHER DR. AKTHAR HUSS Vs.RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER & SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OFTAMIL NADU, HEALTHDATE OF JUDGMENT19/08/1987BENCH: SEN, A.P. (J)BENCH: SEN, A.P. (J)RAY, B.C. (J)CITATION: 1987 AIR 2074 1987 SCR (3)1049 1987 SCC Supl. 329 JT 1987 (3) 370 1987 SCALE (2)351ACT: Professional Colleges--Admission to: Category of 'emi- nent sportsmen'--Selection of--Validity of--Selection must necessarily depend upon academic merit.Constitution of India, Arts. 226 & 136: Powers of the Court--Not obligatory to interfere unless justice of the case so demands.JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petitions (Civil) Nos. 5535-36 of 1987.From the Judgment and Order dated 28.4...
See the full content of this document