JAGDISH SARAN & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS .

Citation: [1980] 2 S.C.R. 831 · Decided: 28-01-1980 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.R. KRISHNA IYER · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 14 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
.. 
• 
831 
JAGDISH SARAN & ORS. 
A 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS . 
January 28, 1980 
[V. R. KRISHNA l¥ER, R. S. PATIIAK AND 0. CH!NNAPPA REDDY, JJ.] 
B 
Co11stitution of India 1950, Articles 15 and 16-Admission to post-graduate 
course in medicine-Rule of Delhi University-Reservation of 70 per cent of 
seats at post graduate level for its own university graduates-Validity of. 
Practice and Procedure-Litigatio11 on socio-legal issue-Brief to be well 
researched and factually detailed. 
C 
The University of Delhi has many post-gradua.te and diploma courses in the 
faculty of n1edicine but all of them put together provide 250 seats. 'fhe .three 
medioal colleges in Delhi turn out annually 400 medical graduates who get 
'house' jobs in the local hospitals and qualify themselves 
for 
post-graduate 
courses. As the graduates from the Delhi University could not be accommo-
dated fully or even in part for the post-graduate courses in medicine and as 
D 
these graduates were not considered for ·admission into other universities on 
account of various regional hurdles such as prescription of domicile, graduation 
in that very university, registration with the State Medicad Council, servic'e in 
the State Medical service etc., the Delhi University had earmarked some seats 
at the poet-graduate level in medicine for the m'edical 
graduates 
of 
Delhi 
University. 
Until April 1978, the nlle for selection of candidates for admission into the 
post-graduate cla.sses in nledicine provided that s'election for 52% of the total 
number of seats was to be made on the basis of combined merit of Delhi 
University and other university medical graduates, and 48 per cent from the 
Delhi University graduates only, 
The rule was amended, reserving 70% of the 
seats at the post-graduate l'evel to Delhi gradua.tes and 30% being open to all, 
including graduates of Delhi. 
E 
The petitioner who was a medical graduate from the 
Madras 
University 
applied for the post-graduate degree in Dermatology in th'e University of Delhi. 
He passed the common entrance test for admission, but his admission was turned 
down because of the rule of the University reserving 70% of the seats· at th1J 
post-graduate level to Delhi University graduates. 
The petitioner in his writ petition under Article 32 challenged th'e rule as 
violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and sought the court's writ 
to direct the University to admit him to the M.D. Course in Dermatology. 
It 
was contended that the University was sustained by Central Government finances, 
collected from the whole country and the benefits must likewise belong to all 
qualified students from ever}"vhere. The University justified the reservation on 
the ground of exclusivism practised by every other University by forbidding 
Delhi University graduates from getting admission in th'eir colleges and also on 
accciunt of the reasonableness of institutional continuity in educational pursuits 
f0r students who enter a. un_iversity for higher studies. 
F 
G 
u 
832 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1980] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Dismissing the writ petition. 
HELD : (per Krishna Iyer & Chinnappa Reddy, JJ.) 
1. Reservation of 70% is too high at the post-graduate level. But the rule 
is not invalidated because the facts are impcrlect, the course has already started 
and the court must act only on sure ground, especially when matters of policy, 
B 
socio-educational, investigation and expert evaluation of variables are involved. 
When fuller facts are placed, the court will go into this question more con· 
fidently. [858 D-EJ 
· 
-0
2. If 70% reservation is on the high side and the petitioner is hop'efully near 
__......
'admission' going by marks it is but just that be is given a chance to do his 
post-graduate course. His coming to Delhi itself was a compulsion beyond his 
C 
control. [858 FJ 
D 
E 
F 
3. Petitioner directed to lie admitted to the degree course this year, If the 
rulesi>'of attendance etc., do not stand in the way and the Medical Council makes 
an exception by agreeing to addition of one scat as a special cas'e for this yeru. 
[858 G] 
4. (i) The University forthwith-not later than two months from today-to 
appoint a time-bound committee to investigate in depth the justification for and 
the qua.ntum of res'ervation at the post-graduate level from the angle of equality 
of opportunity for every Indian. 
That comn1ittee will study facts and figures 
and the reservation realities of other universities

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