2011 (8) TMI 1127 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether the implementation of the 27% reservation for other backward classes (for short OBCs ) in Central Educational Institutions under the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006 (Act No.5 of 2007) (for short CEI Act ) valid? Whether is the meaning to be assigned to the direction the maximum cut-off marks for OBCs be 10% below the cut-off marks of general category candidates in the order dated 14.10.2008 of this Court?

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation of "cut-off marks" for OBC reservations in Central Educational Institutions.
2. Validity of the procedure followed by JNU for OBC admissions.
3. Whether OBC candidates selected on merit should be counted against the OBC reservation quota.

Detailed Analysis:

Interpretation of "Cut-off Marks" for OBC Reservations:
The primary issue revolves around the interpretation of the term "cut-off marks" as used in the Supreme Court's clarificatory order dated 14.10.2008 in P.V. Indiresan & Ors. v. Union of India. The court had to determine whether "cut-off marks" referred to the minimum eligibility/qualifying marks or the marks secured by the last candidate admitted under the general category.

Appellant's Contention:
The appellant argued that "cut-off marks" should refer to the marks secured by the last candidate admitted under the general category. This interpretation would mean that OBC candidates would need to secure marks within a 10% band below the last admitted general category candidate.

Respondents' Contention:
The respondents contended that "cut-off marks" should refer to the minimum eligibility/qualifying marks prescribed for admission. They argued that the lowering of the minimum marks for OBC candidates should not lead to a large disparity with general candidates, thereby ensuring educational standards.

Court's Interpretation:
The Court concluded that "cut-off marks" referred to the minimum eligibility/qualifying marks and not the marks secured by the last candidate admitted under the general category. The Court emphasized that the term "cut-off marks" in the context of the order meant that the eligibility marks for OBCs should be set no lower than 10% below the eligibility marks for general category candidates.

Validity of the Procedure Followed by JNU for OBC Admissions:
JNU's procedure for OBC admissions during 2008-09 and 2009-10 was scrutinized. The university had interpreted the Supreme Court's order to mean that OBC candidates needed to secure marks within a 10% band below the last admitted general category candidate.

Court's Observation:
The Court found this procedure to be arbitrary and discriminatory. It held that eligibility criteria should be declared before the admission process begins and should not be subject to change based on the marks secured by other category candidates. The Court affirmed that the minimum eligibility marks for OBCs should be predetermined and not linked to the fluctuating benchmark of the last general category candidate's marks.

Whether OBC Candidates Selected on Merit Should Be Counted Against the OBC Reservation Quota:
The appellant raised an alternative contention questioning whether OBC candidates who get selected on their own merit should be counted against the 27% OBC reservation quota.

Appellant's Argument:
The appellant argued that OBC candidates selected on merit should be counted towards the OBC quota, unlike SC/ST candidates who are not counted against their reservation quota when selected on merit.

Respondents' Argument:
The respondents contended that the principle of not counting meritorious reserved category candidates against their reservation quota, as established in Indra Sawhney and R.K. Sabharwal, should apply to OBCs as well.

Court's Position:
The Court refrained from deciding this issue, noting that it was not directly raised in the writ petition and had broader implications. The Court acknowledged the importance of the issue and suggested it merits serious consideration in an appropriate case.

Conclusion:
The Court clarified that the term "cut-off marks" refers to the minimum eligibility/qualifying marks for OBC candidates, which should be no lower than 10% below the marks prescribed for general category candidates. It invalidated JNU's procedure of linking OBC admissions to the marks of the last admitted general category candidate. The Court also highlighted the need for a predetermined and transparent admission process. The alternative contention regarding the counting of meritorious OBC candidates against the reservation quota was noted but left undecided for future consideration.

Directions:
1. For the 2011-2012 admissions, if any Central Educational Institution has already converted unfilled OBC seats to general category seats, such admissions shall not be disturbed.
2. Institutions should fill OBC reservation seats with OBC candidates possessing the minimum eligibility/qualifying marks.
3. If the last date for admissions has expired, it shall be extended till 31.8.2011 to enable admissions to vacant OBC seats.