Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

16. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 45(2), the legislature has provided that in respect of subject matter" for which Ordinances have not been framed under Section 29 of the Central Act, the provisions of the Statutes and Ordinances made immediately before the commencement of the Central Act under the provisions of The UP. State Universities Act, 1973, shall be applicable insular as that are not in consistent with the provisions of the Central Act -and the Statutes. The Reservation Order of 1994, which has been issued by the State of U.P. in exercise of powers under Section 28(5) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973, has not been saved and therefore the reservation provided thereunder cannot now be applied for admission to the various courses of Allahabad University. In the alternative it is contended that in, respect of any other Central University situate in the State of U.P. namely Banaras Hindu University, Vananasi, Aligan. Muslim. University, Aligarh, Baba Bhimrao Ambedkar Central University Lucknow, no provision for reservation of seats for admission to various courses favour of Other Backward Classes has been provided and there is no statutory provision applicable to Central Universities providing for reservation in favour of Other Backward Clares category students. Counsel for the petitioner therefore contends that the merit list prepared in pursuance of the entrance examination must be redone and admission may be granted after excluding the reservation of 27%, which has been provided for in respect of Other Backward Classes category candidates. Counsel for the petitioner clarifies that inclusion of a student in the merit list does not confer any right, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in AIR 1992 S.C. 1612; Shankarasan Das v. Union of India, ; State of Uttaranchal and Ors. v. Sidharth Srivastava and Ors. The State Act and order passed thereunder cease to have application on parliamentary enactment, unless they are saved by the Parliamentary Act. Reference- ; Medical Council of lndia v. State of Karnataka and Ors. (paragraph 24, 25, 2C, 27 and 28). ; Panchugopal Barua and Ors. v. Umesh Chandra Goswami and Ors. (Paragraph-12), Learned Counsel for the Allahabad University, in reply submits that on the date the advertisement was made, selections were held find merit list was notified, the provisions of the Parliamentary Act No. 20 of 2005 have not been enforced and University of Allahabad was still within the purview of U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 and accordingly the Reservation Order, 1994, issued in exercise of powers under Section 28(5) by the State Government was binding upon the Allahabad University, therefore the candidates who had been so select against reserved posts are entitled to be admitted against the respective courses. Learned Counsel for the Allahabad University submits that the rules? enforced at the time of initiation of selection process have to be applied till the conclusion of selection process and any change in the rules subsequent to the commencement of selection process, will have no application in the admission process. In support of the said contention, the respondent has placed, reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in the case of P. Mahendran v. State of Kamataka; 1990(1) SCC 441 and Anti Devin Kutty v. Karnataka Public Service Commission . On the strength of the said judgment it is submitted that change in the reservation policy subsequent to the commencement of the selection, cannot obstruct the admissions on the basis of the result already declared by the Allahabad University.

27. At this stage it would also be appropriate to deal with the contention raised on behalf of the respondent, namely that the rules, including reservation provided, "as applicable at the time of initiation of the selection process i.e. publication of the advertisement must necessarily be applied till the admissions are granted and therefore any change of reservation policy subsequent to the selection process having commenced cannot effect the earmarked vacancies for Other Backward Classes being done away with. The principle of law relied upon by the respondent counsel with reference to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P. Mahendran v. State of Karnataka (Supra) is not in dispute, and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has repeatedly held that rules enforced at the time of initiation of selection process have to be applied till the completion of the process, including reservation. However, it is to be seen in the facts of the case as to whether rules; which were enforced at the time of initiation of the process for admission by the Allahabad University, when it was covered by the State Universities Act would still continue to regulate the procedure for admission atter the Allahabad University has been declared to be a Central university. For appreciating the said contention, it would be worthwhile to point out that admittedly the advertisement made by the Allahabad University under the State Universities Act cannot be said to be an advertisement for admission to the various courses of Centra! University, which is altogether different legal entity incorporated, and declared as such by Section 4 of the Act No. 26 of 2005. Similarly, the reservation provided for in respect of Other Backward Classes candidates under Reservation Order of 1994 by the State Government in exercise of powers under Section 28(5) cannot be said to be made applicable for reservation in admission to the various courses of the Central University inasmuch as under the Act No, 26 of 2005 it is for the University, under Section 9 proviso or through its Ordinances, to regulate the procedure for admission including reservation, if any, to be provided for.

24. It was also urged on behalf of the non-official respondents that the selection and appointment has to be made in accordance with the rules in force at the time of initiation of the selection process i.e. publication of advertisement and, therefore, change of reservation policy subsequent to the selection cannot come in the way of earmarked vacancies fo" the kill region of U.P. which became an integral part of the State of Uttaranchal. This is an untenable grievance in view of the discussion made above while dealing with the question whether the selection made by U.P. PSC is binding on the State of Uttaranchal. The rules in force at the time of initiation of the selection process have to be applied in making selections but that does not help the non-official respondents in seeking appointments by the State of Uttaranchal on the basis of selection made by U.P. PSC."