Order
1. The petitioner who appeared for the Combined Pre-Medical Test of 1994 held in the State of U.P challenged a circular issued by the Lucknow University based on a letter dated 17-5-1994 issued by the Secretary, Government of U.P It was claimed that reservation of 65% general seats in the medical colleges was violative of the constitutional guarantee under Articles 16, 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution and the ratio laid down by this Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217, (1992) 22 ATC 385. After the petition was filed the Government issued another notification on 17-12-1994 clarifying its stand in respect of reservations. The relevant portions of it are extracted below:
“In continuation of GO No. 2697.Sek-14.V-94.III/93, dated 17-5-1994, on the above subject, I am directed to say, clarifying the Government policy that horizontal reservation be granted in all medical colleges on total seats of all the courses to be filled through Combined Pre-Medical Test (CPMT) 1994 as given below:
1.
Real dependants of freedom-fighters
05 per cent
2.
Sons/daughters of deceased/disabled soldiers
02 per cent
3.
Physically handicapped candidates
02 per cent
4.
Candidates belonging to hill areas
03 per cent
5.
Candidates belonging to Uttaranchal areas
03 per cent
2. The above reservation would be ‘horizontal’, and the candidates of the above categories, selected on the basis of merit, would be kept under the categories of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes/Other Backward Classes/General to which they belong. For example, if a candidate dependant on a Freedom-Fighter selected on the basis of reservation, belongs to the Scheduled Caste, he will be adjusted against the seats reserved for Scheduled Castes. Similarly, if a physically handicapped candidate selected on the basis of reservation belongs to other Backward Classes or general category, he would be adjusted against the seats reserved for Other Backward Classes or general category.
3. I am also directed to say that ‘vertical’ reservation shall be granted in all medical colleges on total seats of all courses to be filled through CPMT 1994 as given below:
(a)
Scheduled Caste candidates
21 per cent
30 per cent
(b)
Scheduled Tribe candidates
02 per cent
seats in each
(c)
Other Backward Classes candidates
27 per cent
category reserved for ladies.”
In the earlier circular the provision for reservation which is relevant read as under:
“Out of the total seats being filled up through the CPMT 1994, 35% seats are reserved for the candidates belonging to the general category and remaining 65% seats shall be for the reserved categories which are limited to the percentage mentioned against the following categories of the candidates:
Reserved Categories
Percentage of the reserved seats
1.
Backward Classes
27 per cent
(of them 30% reserved for ladies).
2.
Hilly area
3 per cent
(of them 30 per cent reserved for ladies).
3.
Uttarakhand area
3 per cent
(30% reserved for ladies).
4.
Scheduled Castes
21 per cent
(30% reserved for ladies).
5.
Schedule Tribes
2 per cent
(30% reserved for ladies).
6.
Actual dependants of the freedom-fighters
5 per cent
(30 per cent reserved for ladies).
7.
Daughters/sons of soldiers who became handicapped or killed in action/war.
2 per cent
(30% reserved for ladies).
8.
For handicapped candidates
2 per cent
(30% reserved for ladies).
65 per cent
The remaining seats will be of the general category in which 30% reservation will be for the ladies.”
2. Reservation of 65% resulting in reducing the general category to 35% was undoubtedly violative of Article 16. Further by reserving 30% of the general seats for ladies the general category shrank to 5%. But these glaring infirmities have been rectified by the amended circular. Reservation of 30% for ladies has now been confined to para 3 of the amended circular. Dr Dhavan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State clarified that he has instructions to make a statement on the amended circular that now there is no reservation for ladies in the general category.
3. Similarly, the other defect in the circular reserving 35% seats for general category has been removed. The vertical reservation is now 50% for general category and 50% for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes. Reservation of 15% for various categories mentioned in the earlier circular which reduced the general category to 35% due to vertical reservation has now been made horizontal in the amended circular extending it to all seats. The reservation is no more in general category. The amended circular divides all the seats in CPMT into two categories— one, general and other reserved. Both have been allocated 50%. Para 2 of the circular explains that candidates who are selected on merit and happen to be of the category mentioned in para 1 would be liable to be adjusted in general or reserved category depending on to which category they belong, such reservation is not contrary to what was said by this Court in Indra Sawhney 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217, (1992) 22 ATC 385. Whether the reservation for such persons should have been made or not was not challenged, therefore, this Court is not required to examine it.
4. In the result this petition is disposed of by directing that in view of the circular issued by the Government on 17-12-1994 clarified by para 2 the grievance of the petitioner cannot be said to survive. The interim order passed by this Court staying the declaration of results is discharged.