Vidhanashi Kamalia & Anr. v. University of Delhi & Ors.

1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioners whose WP(C) No. 8604/2019 was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 8th August, 2019.

2. Counsel appearing for the appellants (original petitioners) submits that the appellants are seeking admission in LL.B. course with respondent no. 2 university. 2019:DHC:5119-DB

3. These appellants are “unreserved category candidates”. Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the first list of admission was published on 23rd July, 2019, which is at Annexure A-4 to the memo of this LPA. Unreserved category candidate topper has got 325 marks and the last candidate of unreserved category has scored 222 marks at the end of counselling round. The respondent no. 2 university had shifted reserved category candidates from first list to unreserved category candidates of a second list. The appellant contends that this aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while deciding the writ petition, preferred by these appellants (original petitioners) and hence, judgment and order dated 8th August, 2019 delivered by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 8604/2019 deserves to be quashed and set aside.

4. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellants that once the admission is already given to the reserved category candidates in their quota, they cannot be shifted to unreserved category candidates in a second round of counselling. Otherwise, the reservation for reserved category candidates will exceed 50%. It is also submitted by the counsel for appellants (original petitioners) that, had there been no shifting of reserved category candidates to the unreserved category candidates in a second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh lists of merit, published by respondent no. 2 university, more number of unreserved category candidates could have got admission and that this aspect of the matter has not been appreciated by the learned Single Judge and hence, the judgment and order dated 8th August, 2019 delivered by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 8604/2019 deserves to be quashed and set aside.

5. Counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 submits that after publishing first list of admission of the students, the admission process is never over. The admission process remains continued even after publication of the first merit list. Similarly, the admission process still continues even before publication of the second merit list. It goes up to seventh merit list of both reserved and unreserved category candidates. It is also submitted by the counsel for respondent no. 2 that if there are any meritorious reserved category candidates, who have scored more marks then general category candidates, they are bound to be shifted from reserved category candidates to unreserved category candidates. Thus, even after publication of the first list, the students who are in a reserved category candidate, they are always to be shifted to unreserved category candidates in a second list. Similarly, after publication of the second list of admission of students, if there are candidates in reserved category candidates and if they are found more meritorious than the unreserved candidates who succeed in the third round of admission, they are always to be shifted as unreserved category candidates. It is submitted by the counsel for respondent no. 2 that shifting of the reserved category candidates to unreserved category candidates is based upon a principle that “meritorious reserved category candidates is equal to unreserved category candidates”. Thus, after publication of the first list of admission, the admission process continues. In the facts of the present case, admission process continues upto seventh merit list. Thus, the shifting of reserved category candidates to the unreserved category candidates will also continue upto seventh merit list. The counsel for the respondent no.2 submits, that this aspect of the matter has been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while deciding WP(C) NO. 8604/2019 vide judgment and order dated 8th August, 2019 and hence, this LPA may not be entertained by this Court.

6. Having heard learned counsel of both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the appellants (original petitioners) are seeking admission in the LL.B. course with respondent no. 2 university for the academic years 2019-20 as unreserved category candidates.

7. It further appears from the facts of the case that respondent no. 2 university has published first merit list for reserved category candidates as well as for unreserved category candidates on 23rd July, 2019. Thereafter, it appears from the facts of the case that out of unreserved category candidates, few candidates had not taken admission for any reason whatsoever and hence, second list is to be published. Similarly, upto seventh merit list, the admission process has been continuing. Admission process is not over, after publication of first merit list. Admission process continues, till publication of last merit list.

8. The question which has arisen in the writ petition and in this Letters Patent Appeal, is to the effect that whether reserved category candidates, who are otherwise meritorious, can be shifted to unreserved category candidates or not.

9. To the above question, our answer is in affirmative. No error has been committed by the respondent no. 2 university in shifting reserved category candidates to unreserved category candidates, if they are found meritorious like the unreserved category candidates.

10. It further appears from the facts of the case that after the publication of the first merit list, those candidates, who are in reserved category, can always be shifted to unreserved category candidates in a second merit list because in a second merit list, marks have gone down for unreserved category candidates. Thus, whenever the merit of the unreserved category candidates is going down, they are bound to be shifting of meritorious reserved category candidates to the list of unreserved category candidates. This aspect of the matter has been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while deciding WP(C) No. 8604/2019 vide judgment and order dated 8th August, 2019. We are in full agreement with the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge.

11. It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dega Venkata Harsha Vardhan and Ors. vs. Akula Ventaka Harshavardhan and Ors. reported in 2018 (10) SCALE 618, in paragraph 8, which reads as under:

12. In view of the aforesaid decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, whenever the merit of unreserved category candidates is reducing further & further, those who are meritorious reserved category candidates, will always be shifted to the list of unreserved category candidates. Hence, there is no substance in this Letters Patent Appeal and the same is, therefore, dismissed. CM APPL.44519/2019 (U/O-1,R-10 CPC)

1. In view of the order passed in the above appeal, this application is disposed of.

CHIEF JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR, J. OCTOBER 09, 2019 r.bararia