- (1.) These writ petitions highlight the faulty manner in which reservations have been provided and implemented by the government of Uttar Pradesh and its authorities in the matter of admission to medical courses for the year 1994-95. Though the dispute pertains to the academic year 1994-95, we are told that the admissions have been made only in June-July 1995 and are yet to be finalised in respect of certain courses.
(2.) The story begins with the announcement of policy of reservation in the matter of admission to medical courses issued by the government on 17/ 5/1994. According to this notification, sixty-five per cent of seats were reserved in favour of various classes/categories leaving only thirty-five per cent for open competition (OC) category. The reservations provided were to the following effect: A further reservation in favour of women was also provided to the extent of thirty per cent in each of the above categories. The reservations so provided were challenged by way of a writ petition in this court under Article 32 of the Constitution - (Swati Gupta v. State of U. P. ). The contention of the petitioner was that reservation of sixty-five per cent of seats was contrary to the decision of this court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India and, therefore, void. Pending the said writ petition, the government issued a notification on 17/12/1994 modifying the reservation policy contained in the notification of 17/5/1994. It would be appropriate to set out the notification dated 17/12/1994 in its entirety:"no. 6550/sec-14/v-LLL/93 Lucknow From: Ravindra Kumar Sharma, dated 17/12/1994 Sachiv, Uttar Pradesh Shasanto: Director General, Medical Education, Training, U. P. Lucknow. Medical Section-14 Sub: Reservation in seats of MBBS/bds/bhms/bams/bums courses to be filled through CPMT in State Allopathic Medical Colleges/k. G. Medical College, Lucknow/all State Homeopathic/ayurvedic/unani Medical Colleges. Sir, In continuation of GO No. 2697/sec. 14/v-94/111/93 dated 17/5/19944, 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: 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 dependent on a freedom fighter selected on the basis of reservation belongs to reserved for Scheduled Caste, (he will be adjusted against the seat reserved for SC ) Similarly, if a physically handicapped candidate selected on the basis of reservation belongs to other backward class 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: 4. 'Other Backward Classes' mean the classes mentioned in Annx. 1 of Notification No. 488/xvii-V-1-1 (Ka) 8-1994 dated 23/3/19944 notified by Vidhiyaka Anubhag, Uttar Pradesh Adhiniyam No. 4 of 1994. The candidates of backward classes mentioned in Annx. II of the aforesaid Adhiniyam would not be entitled for the reservation. 5. I am also directed to clarify that if a candidate of reserved category, mentioned in para 3 above, is selected along with general category candidates on the basis of merit, he shall not be adjusted against reserved seats, as GO in this regard has already been issued. So, 50% seats of general category shall be filled on the basis of merit prior to filling of reserved seats mentioned in para 3 above. Please ensure strict compliance of these orders. Yours faithfully, sd/- Ravindra Kumar Sharma Sachiv"
(3.) This revised notification was brought to the notice of this court at the hearing of the aforesaid writ petition. After noticing both the aforesaid notifications this court (the bench comprising R. M. Sahai, J. and one of us, Suhas C. Sen, J. ) observed as follows: "2.Reservation of 65% resulting in reducing the general category of 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. 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. " This decision was rendered on 2/2/1995.;