IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 3rd October, 2011
W.P.(C) 6933/2011
Anuj Sharma & Ors. ......Petitioners
Through: Mr. Kush Chaturvedi and Ms.
Priyanka Priyadarshini, Advs.
Vs.
University of Delhi ......Respondent
Through: Mr. MJS Rupal with Ms. Shawana
Bari, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR:
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may
be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest? Yes
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. (Oral)
*
1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, the petitioners seek directions to direct
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 1 of 8
the respondent to convert the OBC category seats to the
general category which have remained unfilled after
31.8.2011.
2. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that 50 seats of the OBC category are
still lying vacant which were never converted to the general
category by the respondent University after filling the seats
in the OBC category as directed by the Apex Court in P.V.
Indiresan Vs. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 7084/2011
decided on 18.8.2011. Counsel submits that there is a clear
defiance on the part of the respondent University of the
directions given by the Apex Court in the matter of P.V.
Indiresan (Supra), as in terms of the said judgment the
respondents were legally bound to convert the vacant OBC
category seats into the general category seats. Counsel also
submits that the rank of some of the petitioners in the
present petition are immediately after the rank of the last
candidate who was granted admission in the general
category. The contention of the counsel for the petitioners
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 2 of 8
is that if all the unfilled seats of OBC category are
converted into the general category, then certainly the
petitioners would have a chance to get admission in the LLB
first year course in the 2011-12 session.
3. Mr. M.J.S. Rupal, learned counsel for the
respondent very fairly admits that there are still 50 unfilled
OBC seats in the first year of the LLB course of the
respondent University. Counsel, however, submits that since
the academic session has already begun from 1.8.2011 and
will close on 13.11.2011, therefore the petitioners have
belatedly approached this court to seek their admissions in
the LLB first year course.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. The following directions were given by the Apex
Court in the case of P.V. Indiresan(supra):
“41. We therefore, dispose of this appeal, affirming the decision
dated 7.9.2010 of the learned Single Judge of the High Court,
subject to the clarifications/observations above, and subject to the
following conditions:
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 3 of 8
(i) In regard to the admissions for 2011-2012, if any Central
Educational Institution has already determined the ‘cut-off marks’ for
OBCs with reference to the marks secured by the last candidate in
the general category, and has converted the unfilled OBC seats to
general category seats and allotted the seats to general category
candidates, such admissions shall not be disturbed. But where the
process of conversion and allotment is not completed, the OBC seats
shall be filled by OBC candidates.
(ii) If in any Central Educational Institution, the OBC reservation
seats remain vacant, such institutions shall fill the said seats with
OBC students.
Only if OBC candidates possessing the minimum eligibility/qualifying
marks are not available in the OBC merit list, the OBC seats shall be
converted into general category seats.
(iii) If the last date for admissions has expired, the last date for
admissions shall be extended till 31.8.2011 as a special case, to
enable admissions to the vacant OBC seats.”
There is not even an iota of doubt that the respondent is in
clear defiance of the above directions given by the Hon’ble
Apex Court. No explanation has come forth from the side of
the respondent University as to why the unfilled 50 OBC
seats were not converted into the general category after the
same remained unfilled after the counseling for the OBC
candidates. The respondents were no doubt awaiting for the
directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court and due to that reason
the counseling process to fill the OBC seats was deferred.
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 4 of 8
As per the respondent, an open house counseling was held
on 20.8.2011 and even after granting admission to OBC
candidates who had participated in the said counseling, still
50 seats of OBC category were left unfilled.
6. It is quite shocking that the non compliance of the
directions of the Apex Court is not by any other institution
but by a Faculty of law, University of Delhi, which is
considered to be one of the premier law institutions in the
country. The Admission Committee of the Law Faculty must
be comprising of law teachers and how can they who teach
and impart education to the students who would become
future lawyers, the means of dispensation of justice of the
society, ignore the directions passed by the Apex Court of the
country is baffling and alarming to say the least. To obey the
mandate of the highest Court of the country is the bounden
duty of all and by adopting a cavalier approach, the
respondents in a most brazen and outrageous manner have
given a go by to the directions of the Apex Court.
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 5 of 8
7. The plea taken by the respondent that the
academic session of the LLB first year course has already
begun does not cut any ice in view of the fact that the
petitioners cannot be made to suffer for no fault on their
part. Ordinarily, the mid stream admissions are not the
preferred norm, but in the case like the present one where
there is a sea of opportunity but is not open to the ones
willing to avail, due to the unreasonableness and high
handedness of the respondents, the court will lean in the
favour where justice can be done and the principles of equity
and good conscience are the torch bearers.
8. The Courts have also consistently held that every
endeavour by the University and all other institutions
should be made to fill all the seats as wastage of seats is not
only at the cost of the public exchequer but at the cost of
depriving a number of aspiring students struggling to get
admission in coveted institutions and universities such as
the Delhi University, which is a dream of many. Hence,
considering the aforesaid circumstances, the respondent is
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 6 of 8
hereby directed to hold a special counseling to fill the
vacant 50 OBC after converting the said vacant 50 OBC
seats into the general category in terms of the directions of
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of P.V. Indiresan
(Supra). The said special counseling shall be conducted by
the respondent university after duly notifying the candidates
belonging to the general category through notice board and
through their website. At least seven days time shall be
given to the candidates through such a notice inviting them
to participate in the said special counseling. The respondent
is also directed to publish an advertisement to this effect in
a national daily so that the candidates can be made aware
that the admissions have yet not been closed so that not only
the present petitioners but the other candidates standing
higher in rank can try their luck to seek admission against
the unfilled vacant seats. It is further directed that after
filling the said 50 seats, the Faculty of Law shall conduct
special classes for such students so that they can cover their
curriculum to appear in their first semester examination.
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 7 of 8
The attendance of such students shall also be reckoned from
the date of their admission in the course and not from the
date when the current academic session had begun.
9. With the above directions, the present petition
stands disposed of.
October 03, 2011 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J
mg
W.P.(C) No. 6933/2011 Page 8 of 8
