LALITHA E P Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are persons who were admitted to Teachers Training Courses. In the first, they were admitted by the Thirumala Devaswom Teachers Training Institute and in the second, by Institutes run by the members of the Christian Community. In both the Original Petitions, it is claimed that the Institutes are minority institutions entitled to the protection of Art.30(1) of the Constitution of India, though in neither of the Original Petitions there is a specific allegation that the concerned Institute is 'established and run' by a minority community. But for the purpose of these cases, I propose to proceed on the basis that the Institutes that admitted these petitioners are minority institutions.

(2.) In Fr. K. J. Thomas v. State ( 1993 (2) KLJ 402 ), A Division Bench of this court, following the decision of the Supreme court in St. Stephen's College v. University of Delhi ( AIR 1992 SC 1630 ), held that admission to 50% of the seats reserved for admission from the minority community concerned, should also be on merit basis. The Division Bench specifically held that the decision in Younus Kunju v. State of Kerala 1988 (2) KLT 299 ) cannot be said to lay down the correct law in view of the decision in St. Stephen's College case. The Division Bench directed that the admission to the seats reserved for the minority community in their Institutions, should also be based on merits from the candidates of the concerned community.

(3.) In the light of this clear decision, the Government issued a direction as per Notification No. M2-120000/93/DPI dated 3-2-1994 that admission to the seats reserved for being filled by the minority should also be on merits. Clause.20 of that notification was the relevant clause. This notification was challenged before this court by some of the institutions. The cases were ultimately referred to a Full Bench presumably because the decision of the Division Bench in Fr. K. J. Thomas v. State (1993 (2) KLJ 402) in respect of admission to the seats reserved for the minority was questioned. But, when the matter came up before the Full Bench, the Institutions or the other petitioners in those Original Petitions did not seek a decision on merits. The judgment of the Full Bench in O. P. 5427 of 1994 and the connected Original Petitions, states that a statement had been filed by the State to the effect that the Council of Ministers have decided that the Government need not oppose the prayer of the private managements in respect of admissions to the T.T.C. Course, in the Original Petitions pending in the High Court of Kerala. It is further stated that the Advocate General submitted that Clause.20 in the notification will not be enforced during the academic year 1994-95. The Original Petitions were disposed of on the basis of that statement. It has to be noted that the decision in Fr. K. J. Thomas v. State was not sought to be in any way modified or varied by the Full Bench. But, apparently, the Full Bench was permitting the State to go against the specific direction issued and the managements to violate the positive direction given in Fr. K. J. Thomas v. State. In my humble view, since the decision in Fr. K. J. Thomas v. State was not overruled, the same continues to be the law for the State and binding on the State and the Institutions. I have also to notice that there was no decision on merits by the Full Bench, so that it cannot be taken that any law has been laid down by the decision in O. P. No. 5427 of 1994 and the connected cases. The disposal by the Full Bench was on 17-1-1995.