Writ C No. 45023 of 2011. Case: Abhinav Agnihotri Vs The Mahamaya Technical University and Ors.. High Court of Allahabad (India)
| Case Number | Writ C No. 45023 of 2011 |
| Judges | V.K. Shukla, J. |
| Issue | Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 1955 - Rule 9(3); Constitution of India - Articles 15(3), 15(5), 16, 16(1) and 16(4) |
| Judgement Date | November 04, 2011 |
| Court | High Court of Allahabad (India) |
Judgment:
V.K. Shukla, J.
-
The Petitioner has rushed to this Court with request to quash the order dated 02.08.2011 communicated to him informing and intimating that seat details have been again looked into and have been found to be in order, and further to accord admission in B. Tech Course-2011 at HBTI, Kanpur.
-
Factual matrix of the case is that Mahamaya Technical University, NOIDA, Gautam Budh Nagar conducted U.P. State Entrance Examination-2011 (UPEE-2011) for the purposes of providing admission in B. Tech courses and other similar courses in the State of U.P. Advertisement was issued in this direction and the last date for receipt of application form was 04.03.2011; the date of examination scheduled to be held was 16-17.04.2011. The Information Brochure so published contained details of the procedure for selection and reservation provided to the different categories, horizontal and vertical in nature as well as intake of different colleges for which entrance examination was to be conducted.
-
Pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement the Petitioner applied for consideration of his candidature in the category of Freedom Fighter. Paragraph 9 of the Brochure provides for reservation. Paragraph 9.1 deals with vertical reservation regarding S.C., S.T. and OBC and Paragraph 9.2 deals with horizontal reservation of different categories, such as (a) dependents of Freedom Fighter, (b) sons/daughters of defence personnel of U.P. either retied or killed/disabled in action or defence personnel posted in U.P., (c) Handicapped/Disabled of U.P. and (d) Girls of U.P. In paragraph 9.3. it was mentioned that except for the girl students, male candidates have to opt for only one category of horizontal reservation and the same has to be properly mentioned in the OMR and also at the time of admission on proforma certificate. Paragraph 9 of the information Brochure is quoted below:
-
Reservations
9.1 Vertical Reservation (Category)
Category
Percentage of Reservation
(a) Scheduled Caste of U.P.
21%
(b) Scheduled Tribe of U.P.
02%
(c) Other Backward Classes of U.P.
27%
9.2 Horizontal Reservation (sub-category available in each category):
Sub-category
Code
Maximum percentage of total seats
(a) dependents of Freedom Fighter from U.P.
UPFF
02%
(b) sons/daughters of defence personnel of U.P. either retied (superannuated) or killed/disabled in action or defence personnel posted in U.P.
UPAF
05%
(c) Handicapped/Disabled of U.P.
UPHC
03%
(d) Girls of U.P.
UPGL
20%
-
Petitioner submits that he qualified the written examination and his rank was 3675, and has further proceeded to mention that in U.P. dependents of Fighter Freedom category, he obtained 9th place. Petitioner submits that in the counseling, he locked as his first choice the HBTI Kanpur in Computer Science and Engineering and as second choice in the same institution in Electronics and Engineering, and third choice at the same institution was in Mechanical Engineering. Petitioner has stated that he has not been able to get any seat in HBTI Kanpur, rather he has been allocated Institute of engineering and Technology at Sitapur Road, Lucknow. On verification, Petitioner found that in HBTI Kanpur out of 478 seats, admission has given to only 443 students, and the dependents of Freedom Fighter were only four from the general category, and thereafter one seat has been allotted in favour of OBC Freedom Fighter. The Petitioner has also obtained reservation chart from the Website of the College. A perusal of the aforesaid chart makes it clear that in HBTI Kanpur reservation to the general category in freedom fighter out of 9 seats, 4 were reserved for general, 2 for OBC and 2 for SC category. The chart further goes to show that 4 seats of general category have been filled up and only one seat of OBC has been filled up and no one turned up from SC category. The Petitioner has further proceeded to mention that the Petitioner having secured 9th place in Freedom Fighter category, he was entitled to be accommodated in HBTI Kanpur, as on account of reservation quota accorded on horizontal basis to the dependents of Fighter Freedom remains unfilled, and in this background requisite relief be accorded to the Petitioner by giving direction to grant admission to the Petitioner in B. Tech course 2011 in HBTI, Kanpur in computer Science and Engineering or Electronics Engineering or Mechanical Engineering under Freedom Fighter category. At this juncture, present writ petition has been filed.
-
Counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit have been filed and therein stand has been taken that the seat allotment has been properly done as per reservation policy, and the Petitioner has failed to make place for himself, and it has also been reiterated that total 9 seats were allotted to the dependents of Freedom Fighter of U.P. and out of the same 4 seats have been allotted to general category candidates, 2 for OBC, 1 for SC and for ST category candidates. In this background, it has been stated that all the 4 sears from the category from which Petitioner hails have been filled up, as such no benefit or advantage can be availed by the Petitioner. Counter affidavit has also been filed by the University and the same set of facts have been reiterated. However, it has been further stated that the vacant reserved seat gets de-reserved only after the second round of counseling is undertaken as per declared schedule. It has been stated that the date for admission to the allotted candidates was 19.08.2011 and as the last date was over and due to non-reporting of some candidate in college, the seat could not be filled after the counseling was over. Further reiteration has been made that the seats have been distributed in different disciplines and allotted purely on merit through the Statewide online counseling process.
-
Rejoinder affidavit has been filed and therein the list of total students admitted as obtained by the Petitioner from the Website of the College has been appended, and it has been emphasized that the vacancy in question which was lying vacant should be de-reserved. It has been stated that as per record nobody has been given admission in Computer Science or Mechanical Engineering under Freedom Fighter quota and the Petitioner having secured 9th place, is entitled to be given admission in accordance with the same.
-
After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged, present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties.
-
Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, contended that in the present case once horizontal reservation has been provided for to the extent of 2% of the total seats for subcategory i.e. dependents of Freedom Fighter category, then out of total number of seats which were liable to be settled, total 9 seats were liable to be filled up from amongst the dependents of Freedom Fighters of U.P., and here the factual circumstance as is reflected from the chart so brought on record is that only 7 candidates from the dependents of Freedom Fighter from U.P. have been accorded admission based on horizontal reservation, as such in the facts of the case as requisite number of dependents of Freedom Fighter from U.P. remains unrepresented and seats are lying vacant, as such requisite relief be accorded to the Petitioner.
-
Countering the said submission, Sri Neeraj Tiwari, Advocate, representing the Respondent University as well as Sri S.M. Dayal, Advocate, representing the HBTI Kanpur, on the other hand, has contended that 9 seats available for the category in question had...
To continue reading
Request your trial