New Delhi: The Supreme court on Friday will decide the admission criteria for OBC students into central institutions like Delhi University and Jawaharlal Nehru University under the 27% quota provision.
Justice P Sathasivam and AK Patnaik will address the ambiguity and agreed to decide this tricky yet highly contentious issue on Friday. Citing a constitution bench judgment, senior advocate Indu Malhotra argued that it was to be 10% less than the last cut-off mark for general category candidates but JNU was admitting students who had scored 10% less than the eligibility criteria for general category.
This means, if the last cut-off for general category, which saw an astounding 100% for a college in Delhi, was 80%, then the OBC candidates must get 70% to be eligible for admission to the reserved seats under the Central Educational Institutes (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006. In most institutes, the admission eligibility criteria for general category candidates is 50% marks, and the OBC candidates who score more than 40% are considered for admission.
Under the 2006 Act, the central educational institutes were asked to increase their seats to accommodate OBC candidates without reducing the intake of general category candidates.
Senior advocate A Mariarputham and counsel Sanjay Parikh argued that this would mean no OBC candidate would get admission and the seats lapse back to general category.
By applying the 10% less than cut-off criteria, rather than 10% less than the eligibility, the general category would usurp the additional seats created for the benefit of OBC candidates negating the purpose of the social welfare legislation.
In the 2008 judgment in Ashoka Thakur case, the apex court had upheld the constitutional validity of 27% quota for OBC candidates but had warned against dilution of merits. Two Judges - Justices Arijit Pasayat and C K Thakker - had recommended lowering the eligibility criteria for OBC candidates by 5% marks, while Justice Dalveer Bhandari stressed for reducing it by 10% from the cut-off prescribed for general category.
A constitution bench in 2009 attempted to clarify the confusion and said that it should be fixed at 10% less than the cut-off prescribed for general candidates. But, it appears the confusion between the cut-off and eligibility criteria continues to persist.
The argument of the OBC candidates is that the central educational institutions was free from prescribing high eligibility criteria for general category candidates in its prospectus and apply 10% less rule for backward class students. But, the institute cannot shut the doors of admission to OBCs by resorting to the last cut-off of admitted general category candidates making most backward class students ineligible for higher studies.
Justice P Sathasivam and AK Patnaik will address the ambiguity and agreed to decide this tricky yet highly contentious issue on Friday. Citing a constitution bench judgment, senior advocate Indu Malhotra argued that it was to be 10% less than the last cut-off mark for general category candidates but JNU was admitting students who had scored 10% less than the eligibility criteria for general category.
This means, if the last cut-off for general category, which saw an astounding 100% for a college in Delhi, was 80%, then the OBC candidates must get 70% to be eligible for admission to the reserved seats under the Central Educational Institutes (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006. In most institutes, the admission eligibility criteria for general category candidates is 50% marks, and the OBC candidates who score more than 40% are considered for admission.
Under the 2006 Act, the central educational institutes were asked to increase their seats to accommodate OBC candidates without reducing the intake of general category candidates.
Senior advocate A Mariarputham and counsel Sanjay Parikh argued that this would mean no OBC candidate would get admission and the seats lapse back to general category.
By applying the 10% less than cut-off criteria, rather than 10% less than the eligibility, the general category would usurp the additional seats created for the benefit of OBC candidates negating the purpose of the social welfare legislation.
In the 2008 judgment in Ashoka Thakur case, the apex court had upheld the constitutional validity of 27% quota for OBC candidates but had warned against dilution of merits. Two Judges - Justices Arijit Pasayat and C K Thakker - had recommended lowering the eligibility criteria for OBC candidates by 5% marks, while Justice Dalveer Bhandari stressed for reducing it by 10% from the cut-off prescribed for general category.
A constitution bench in 2009 attempted to clarify the confusion and said that it should be fixed at 10% less than the cut-off prescribed for general candidates. But, it appears the confusion between the cut-off and eligibility criteria continues to persist.
The argument of the OBC candidates is that the central educational institutions was free from prescribing high eligibility criteria for general category candidates in its prospectus and apply 10% less rule for backward class students. But, the institute cannot shut the doors of admission to OBCs by resorting to the last cut-off of admitted general category candidates making most backward class students ineligible for higher studies.
No comments:
Post a Comment