UIET, CCET & Panjab University not Central Educational Institutions: HC

Tribune News Service

Advertisement

Chandigarh, August 20

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the University Institute of Engineering and Technology (UIET), Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology (CCET-26) and Panjab University do not come under the ambit of the term Central Educational Institution.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Vikas Suri also ruled that reservation in terms of Central Education Institutes (Reservation and Admission) Act, 2006, could not be forced upon these institutes.

“Reservation rules of the Chandigarh Administration and Panjab University, not providing reservation for SEBC/OBC category in admissions to the institutions under it, is a matter of policy decision and does not vest any right in the petitioner to seek issuance of mandamus to grant such reservation,” the court added.

The assertions came on a petition filed by a candidate seeking, among other things, directions to the Union of India and other respondents to provide 27 per cent reservation to the socially and educationally backward classes’ category in admission and to consider his candidature under the OBC category.

Appearing before the Bench, the petitioner and his natural guardian/father argued that the CCET-26 being a central educational institution ought to have provided for reservation in admissions under the SEBC/OBC category in terms of the Central Educational Institutions (Reservations in Admission) Act, 2006.

The Bench observed that a Division Bench had already held that Panjab University would stand on the same footing as other state universities. Reliance was placed on earlier Division Bench judgments, holding that Panjab University was not a central university.

“There is no rationale in the argument that just because Chandigarh Administration was issuing OBC certificate to the residents of Chandigarh, it ought to provide for reservation in admissions for the said category dehors their policy decision on reservation. On the contrary, the Administration would do disservice to the class of citizens if it does not issue the requisite certificate, as it would curtail the right of a candidate seeking benefit on the basis of such certificate in institutions providing reservation for OBC category, in admissions or service matters,” the Bench asserted.

Before parting with the order, the Bench asserted that it was ultimately for the state to provide for reservation to a particular class/category. No state could be compelled to do so. “A writ of mandamus can only be issued where a legal right vests in the petitioner and there is a violation of that right by the government. Where a legal right is violated by a government order made pursuant to an existing reservation policy, a writ of mandamus can lie. However, the court cannot interfere in the policy making sphere of the government and instruct it to provide reservations,” the Bench added.