- (1.) The appeals arise from a common judgment disposing of O. P. Nos. 4873, 5006, 5004, 5188 and 5449 of 1974. The Original Petitions raise the same question that has been dealt with in the judgment which gave rise to the appeals.
(2.) The points raised in arguments advanced in the Writ Appeals and the Original Petitions by counsel were also common. We shall therefore dispose of the Writ Appeals and the Original Petitions by this common judgment.
(3.) The facts of the Original Petitions disposed of by the common judgment which is under appeal in the Writ Appeals have been stated in Para.1 to 6 of the judgment. We shall extract those paragraphs: "The petitioners in these Original Petitions applied for admission to the first M.B.B.S. course for the year 1974-75. But they did not get admission. The petitioners who belong to communities which are socially and educationally backward, question the constitutionality of the restriction imposed in G. O P. 208/66/Edn. dated 2-5-1966 (Ext. P-1 in. O. P. No. 4873 of 1974) which insists that only applicants who are members of families whose aggregate annual income is below Rs. 6000/- will be entitled to admission to the seats reserved for students belonging to the backward classes. The petitioners have got alternate contention that in any case, the income ceiling of Rs. 6000/- fixed in Ext. P1 G. O. is highly arbitrary and hence not valid and sustainable. 2. The petitioner in O.P. No. 4873 of 1974 belongs to the Muslim community. She secured 349 marks and is entitled to 5 marks more on the basis of her sport certificate. Though she secured more marks than the minimum fined this year for candidates of the Muslim community, she was not selected for admission to the first M.B.B S. course. Her father is a small businessman. She did not produce an income certificate of the Tahsildar because her father was having income which is a little more than Rs.6000/-. the ceiling fixed in Ext. P-1 G.O. Along with the petitioner's application Exts P-3 and P-4 income tax assessment orders issued to the petitioner's father for the years 1972-73 and 1973-74 respectively were submitted. As per Ext. P-3 the net income is Rs.3710/- and as per Ext. P-4 the net income is Rs.7020/-. As the petitioner's name was not included in the list of selected candidates, she on 5-11-1974 submitted Ext. P-5 application before the 2nd respondent State. No orders are so far issued on Ext. P-5 and the enquiries made by the petitioner's father revealed that there is no prospect of Ext P-5 application being allowed in view of Ext. P-1 and the other orders in the matter. It is under the above circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court with this Original Petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the ceiling of income limit in Ext. P-1 and other subsequent orders in the matter and for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order to treat the petitioner as a member of socially and educationally backward class and to consider the petitioner for admission to the Medical College in the State and to admit the petitioner for the first M.B.B.S. course. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent Principal, Medical College, Trivandrum. The statement in the above counter affidavit is that candidates from families whose annual income is less than Rs.6000/- are only eligible to be considered for admission under reservation. The petitioner has not produced the income certificate and hence she was not considered under reservation. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit. The statement in the reply affidavit is that the direction in Ext. P-1 G.O. is that applicants should produce only a community certificate and there is no mention about the production of an income certificate. It is also pointed out in the reply affidavit that nothing is mentioned therein about the contentions raised by the petitioner in the Original Petition. 3. The petitioner in O.P No. 5006 of 1974 is also a member of the Muslim community. He secured 352 marks and has more than the minimum required for admission for candidates belonging to the Muslim community. Respondents 3 to 5 are candidates selected for admission and who have got only lesser marks than the petitioner. The petitioner in this Original Petition also questions the ceiling of income provided in, the Government Order dated 2-5-1966 and also seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus directing that the petitioner be admitted to the first M. B.B S. course in any one of the Medical Colleges in the State. A counter affidavit has been filed in this case on behalf of the 2nd respondent State of Kerala. The averments and contentions raised in the counter affidavit are similar to those raised in the counter affidavit filed in O.P. No. 4873 of 1974. As per order on C.M.P. No. 589 of 1975 respondents 3 to 5 were removed from the party array. 4. The petitioner in O. P. No. 5004 of 1974 belongs to Vanika Vysya community. She secured 348 marks and she is also entitled to 5 marks more on the basis of her sports certificate though the minimum marks fixed this year for her community is 342. As her name did not find a place in the list of selected candidates she made Ext. P3 representation before the 2nd respondent State of Kerala. But the 2nd respondent did not pass any orders on Ext. P-3. As per order on C. M. P. No. 30 of 1975 the petitioner impleaded two selected candidates as additional respondents. 5. The petitioner in O. P. No. 5188 of 1974 belongs to the Thiyya community She secured 359 marks which is more than the minimum fixed for applicants from that community this year. According to the petitioner, respondents 3 to 6 who are candidates selected for admission secured only lesser marks. The petitioner's case is that she was not selected for one of the reserved seats because her father's income in 1973-74 was more than the ceiling fixed by the Government Order dated 2-5-1966. When her name did not find a place in the list of selected candidates, she submitted a representation before the 2nd respondent State. She complains that no orders have so far been pasted on her representation. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent State of Kerala. The 4th respondent, a candidate selected for the first M. B. B. S. course, also has filed a counter affidavit controverting the contentions raised by the petitioner in the Original Petition. 6. The petitioner in O. P. No. 5449 of 1974 is a member of the Thiyya community, who secured 363 marks which is more than the minimum prescribed this year for the applicants from that community. The Petitioner's grievance is that though respondents 3 to 6 who secured only lesser marks were selected, she was not selected, the reason being that her father's income is more than Rs.6000/-. Subsequent to the filing of this Original Petition, as per order on CMP No. 1277 of 1975 dated 23-1-1975 the 3rd respondent has been removed from the party array.";