TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court upholds 50% institutional reservation in PG courses, clarifies All-India quota application.</h1> <h3>Saurabh Choudhary and Ors. Versus Union of India (UOI) and Ors.</h3> Saurabh Choudhary and Ors. Versus Union of India (UOI) and Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Constitutionality of reservation based on residence or institutional preference in PG courses.2. Implementation of the Supreme Court's judgment dated November 4, 2003, regarding the All-India quota for PG seats.3. Prospective applicability of the judgment in Saurabh Chaudri v. Union of India.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Constitutionality of Reservation Based on Residence or Institutional Preference in PG Courses:The Court examined whether any reservation based on residence or institutional preference is constitutionally permissible in postgraduate (PG) courses. The Court upheld the constitutional validity of institutional reservation, noting that such reservations are reasonable and in public interest. The Court referenced the case of Dr. Pradeep Jain, where it was held that institutional preference should not exceed 50% of the total seats. This principle was reiterated in subsequent cases, including Dr. Dinesh Kumar and Magan Mehrotra. The Court emphasized that the merit of students should be judged on the basis of a common entrance test held nationwide.2. Implementation of the Supreme Court's Judgment Dated November 4, 2003:The judgment mandated that the All-India quota for PG seats should be increased to 50% from the existing 25%. The process of admission for the current academic year had already commenced based on the 25% quota. The Court clarified that the decision in Saurabh Chaudri's case should be applied prospectively, thus excluding the ongoing admission process from its operation. The Court directed that the allotment of seats under the All-India quota for the current year should remain confined to 25%. Consequently, applications seeking to implement the 50% quota for the current year were dismissed, and the interim stay on counselling was vacated.3. Prospective Applicability of the Judgment in Saurabh Chaudri v. Union of India:The Court addressed whether the judgment in Saurabh Chaudri should be applied prospectively from the academic year 2005-06. The Court held that the judgment should be applied prospectively, excluding the ongoing admission process. The Court noted that the Union of India and other states were aware of the judgment but did not implement it immediately. The Court emphasized that a judgment declaring the law may affect rights retrospectively unless expressly stated otherwise. The Court concluded that the judgment in Saurabh Chaudri should be given full effect from the next academic year to ensure that merit prevails in admissions.Separate Judgment:One judge dissented, arguing that the judgment in Saurabh Chaudri should be implemented immediately, even for the ongoing admission process. The dissenting opinion emphasized that the declaration of law should affect the rights of the parties retrospectively and that the judgment should be given full effect to ensure that meritorious students are not disadvantaged.Conclusion:The Supreme Court clarified that the judgment in Saurabh Chaudri v. Union of India, which mandated a 50% All-India quota for PG seats, should be applied prospectively from the next academic year. The ongoing admission process, which commenced based on a 25% quota, should not be disturbed. The Court upheld the constitutional validity of institutional reservation, emphasizing that merit should be the primary criterion for admissions.
TaxTMI 