DR. GULSHAN PRAKASH & ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 16 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 02-12-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, P. SATHASIVAM, J.M. PANCHAL · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 16 (ADDL.) S.C.R. i 
DR. GULSHAN PRAKASH & ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 7964 of 2009) 
DECEMBER 02, 2009 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN CJI., P. SATHASIVAM AND 
J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.] 
A 
8 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 15 - Prohibition of 
discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste etc. -
C 
Prospectus for Post-Graduate level medical courses issued 
by University in Haryana, not providing any reservation of 
seats for SC/ST candidates - Challenge to - Writ petition 
dismissed by High Court- On appeal, held: Article 15(4) does 
not make any mandatory provision for reservation - State D 
Government is a competent authority to make reservation for 
SC/ST/backward classes category at Post-Graduate level in 
admission -
It took conscious decision not to make 
reservation for SC/ST/backward classes at Post-Graduate 
level -
Thus, the decision does not suffer from infirmity -
E 
Even, Medical Council of India which governs Post-Graduate 
Degree/Diploma in medical education did not follow strict 
adherence to rule of reservation policy in admission for SCI 
ST category. 
The question which arose for consideration in the F 
instant appeal was whether High Court was justified in 
dismissing the writ petition filed by appellants for 
quashing of the prospectus for the MD/MS/PG Diploma 
and MOS Courses issued by Maharshi Dayanand 
University, Rohtak, Haryana for Academic Session 2007-
G 
2008 to the extent that it did not provide any reservation 
of seats for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe 
candidates. 
1 
H 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 16 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
ii. 
A 
In .the writ petition filed before this Court, the 
~
prospectus issued by the Maharshi Dayanand University 
for the same course for academic session 2009-2010 is 
under challenge. 
B 
Dismissing the appeal and the writ petition, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The principle behind Article 15 (4) of the 
Constitution of India, 1950 is that a preferential treatment 
can be given validly when the socially and educationally 
backward classes need it. Article 15 (4) is an enabling 
c provision. It enables the State Government to make 
provisions for upliftment of Scheduled Castes and 
Schedules Tribes including reservation of seats for 
admission to educational institutions. Article 15 (4) is not 
an exception but only makes a special application of the 
D principle of reasonable classification. Article 15 (4) does 
not make any mandatory provision for reservation and 
I-
the power to make reservation under article 15 (4) is 
discretionary and no writ can be issued to effect 
reservation. Such special provision maybe made not only 
E by the Legislature but also by the Executive. [Para 13) 
[13-B-D] 
1.2. The Government of India itself has made a 
provision for reservation of SC/ST categories. This was 
• 
F a decision by the Government of India and it is applicable 
in respect of All-India Entrance Examination for MD/MS/ 
PG Diploma and MOS Courses, and reservation for SC/ 
ST candidates in All-India quota for PG seats. However, 
the same cannot automatically be applied in other 
selections where State Governments have power to 
G regulate. The Government of Haryana in the counter 
affidavit before the High Court, explained their position 
... 
that according to them, the matter regarding reservation 
of seats in the PG Courses was considered by the State 
Government from time to time and it was decided that 
H keeping in view the recommendations of the Medical 
+ 
DR. GULSHAN PRAKASH & ORS. v. STATE OF 
3 
HARYANA & ORS. 
Council of India and precedents in the other States, A 
reservation of SCIST in PG Courses is neither feasible nor 
warranted, as there is already a reservation of 50 per cent 
of the total seats in MDIMSIPG Diploma and MOS Course 
in the in.stitutions of the State of Haryana on all-India 
basis entrance examination, being conducted by AllMS, 
B 
New Delhi, and that the appellants had already availed the 
benefit of reservation of seats in their qualifying 
examination of MBBSIBDS. They further clarified that 
only the State Government is the Competent Authority to 
decide the reservation in the State. The State Government c 
did not prescribe any reservation for SCIST and 
backward classes in admission to MDIMSIPG Diploma 
and MOS Course, due to which it was not included in the 
prospectus. Since Government of Haryana has taken a 
conscious decision of not to make reservation for SCIST 0 
categories in admission at the Po

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.