Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2019 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1677 - HC - Indian LawsMaintainability of petition - Validity of Ordinance which came into force on 20th May, 2019 - amendment in Section 16 of the Maharashtra State Reservation (of seats for admission in educational institutions in the State and for appointments in the public services and posts under the State) for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018 - HELD THAT - Based upon the weighty arguments advanced on behalf of the respondents and intervenors by their respective learned Senior Counsel, learned counsel and learned Government Pleader, the answer would have to be given as in the negative, that the petition could not be admitted. It may be pointed out here that the petitioners also knew that the directions given in the order dated 4th June, 2019 were likely to have a prohibitive impact on this petition. This can be seen from the averments made in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Misc. Application filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. One of the averments is that 16% seats, reserved in favour of the socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC), are subject matter in this petition and therefore the decision in this petition is likely to substantially affect the admisision process. The other submission was that with such impact on the admission process and embargo placed upon entertaining further petition/application in respect of the admission for the present academic year a clarification was due that clause (9) of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 4th June, 2019 would not come in the way of the High Court while deciding the present petition, particularly, keeping in view the order dated 24th May, 2019 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. But, the application was rejected observing that order dated 4th June, 2019 required no clarification. Such rejection according to us has only made it even more clear that this petition being of such a nature as would have a substantial impress on the admission for the present academic year one way or the other, now cannot be entertained by this Court. Petition dismissed as not maintainable.
Issues:
1. Whether the intervenors/students are necessary parties in the case. 2. Challenge to the legality and validity of an Ordinance amending Section 16 of the SEBC Act, 2018. 3. Interpretation of orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding the admission process for the academic year. 4. Maintaining the harmony between different orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court. 5. Impact of the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the present petition. Analysis: 1. The High Court held that the intervenors/students are necessary parties in the case, allowing the applications and joining them as respondents with necessary amendments to the cause title. This decision was made to ensure all relevant parties are included in the proceedings. 2. The petition challenged the legality and validity of an Ordinance that amended Section 16 of the SEBC Act, 2018. The petitioners approached the High Court after being granted liberty by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The timeline of events following the Ordinance issuance and subsequent directions from the Supreme Court was detailed in the judgment. 3. The High Court considered the interpretation of orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding the admission process for the academic year. It was noted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had already given clear directions regarding the admission process, and further interpretation by the High Court was deemed unnecessary. 4. Emphasizing the need for maintaining harmony between different orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the High Court declined to entertain the petition, as the Supreme Court had already provided a clear interpretation of its earlier order. The arguments presented by both sides were considered, leading to the dismissal of the petition as not maintainable. 5. The impact of the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the present petition, especially regarding the admission process for the academic year, was a crucial factor in the High Court's decision to dismiss the petition. The rejection of the application seeking clarification further reinforced the view that the petition could not be entertained due to its potential impact on the admission process. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the petition as not maintainable before them, considering the clarity of the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the potential impact of the petition on the admission process for the academic year. The detailed analysis encompassed various legal arguments and interpretations, ultimately leading to the decision to dismiss the petition.
|