https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296660 The challenge to Rule 5 regarding reservation for socially and educationally backward classes failed as the court found that the list of backward classes was based on social and educational backwardness, not solely on caste. Rule 8, which provided for district-wise allocation of seats, was struck down as it was found to violate Article 14 of the Constitution by potentially leading to discrimination in the selection process. Allegations of mala fide actions in the selection process were not proven, and compliance with the University Act and Rules was upheld. The petitioners/appellant were partly successful, with Rule 8 being invalidated for future selections. en-us Wed, 17 Jan 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Jul 2021 18:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296660 The challenge to Rule 5 regarding reservation for socially and educationally backward classes failed as the court found that the list of backward classes was based on social and educational backwardness, not solely on caste. Rule 8, which provided for district-wise allocation of seats, was struck down as it was found to violate Article 14 of the Constitution by potentially leading to discrimination in the selection process. Allegations of mala fide actions in the selection process were not proven, and compliance with the University Act and Rules was upheld. The petitioners/appellant were partly successful, with Rule 8 being invalidated for future selections. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 17 Jan 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296660