IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :-06.08.2010 Coram The HONOURABLE MR.M.Y.EQBAL THE CHIEF JUSTICE and The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.Nos.13130, 13450, 12700 to 12702, 15274 to 15277, 16277, 16278, 16539, 16869 & 16870 of 2010,15933/09 W.P.Nos.10803 & 13795 of 2009 M.P.Nos.1, 2&3 of 2010 & 4/10 M.P.Nos.1, 2&3 of 2010 & M.P.Nos.1,1, 2&2 of 2010 M.P.No.1 of 2010 & M.P.Nos.1&2 of 2010 & M.P.Nos.1,1, 2&2 of 2010 Federation of Puducherry Parents - Students Affected by Regionwise Reservation, Rep. by its General Secretary, No.19, Main Street, Vinayaga Murugan Nagar, Chinnaiyanpet, New Saram, Puducherry – 605 013. ... Petitioner in W.P.No.13130/2010 A.JAYAKUMAR .. PETITIONER IN WP NO.13450/10 KUKKALA KESAVA SRI VENKATA SUBRAHMANYAM S/O.K.RAMACHANDRA RAO, METTACUR VILLAGE YANAM (MINOR REP BY NATURAL GUARDIAN AND FATHER K.RAMACHANDRA RAO) ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.12700/10 PALANKI PATTABHI SAIKUMAR S/O.P.V.S.SASTRY YANAM (MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN AND FATHER P.VENKATASUBRAYA SASTRY) ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.12701/10 GUTHULA NEETHU HARI D/O.G.GOVINDA JAYARAMA RAO YANAM (MINOR REP. BY NATURAL GUARDIAN & FATHER G.GOVINDA JAYARAMA RAO) ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.12702/10 V.RAJA MINOR REP BY FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN R. VELAYUDHAM ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.15274/10 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ V.THIRUMARAN MINOR REP BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN P.VIJAYAN ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.15275/10 L.ILAKKIYA MINOR REP BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN K.LINGASAMY ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.15276/10 S.VIJAYAKUMAR MINOR REP BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN C.SUBRAMANIAN ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.15277/10 RANGANAAYAKI (MINOR) REP. BY HER FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN K.GANESSANE ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.16277/10 NIRUBAMA (MINOR) REP BY HER FATHER AND GUARDIAN P.VIJAYALAKSHMI ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.16278/10 M.ARCHANA ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.16539/10 M.VIKNESH MINOR REP BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN MAYAKRISHNAN ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.16869/10 SELVI LAKSHMIPRIYA MINOR REP BY HER FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN S.ILANGOVAN ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.16870/10 BALAJI VISWANATH MINOR REP BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN BALACHANDAR ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.15933/09 1 M.MUTHUPRASANTH 2 G.ARAVINDAGOUTHAM 3 A.RAMYA 4 R.PRADIVI RAJ 5 MARTIN ANTHONY RAJ 6 T.MANIAMMAI ..PETITIONERS IN WP NO.10803/09 (ALL PETITIONER BEING MINOR REP. BY FATHER/MOTHER/ NATURAL GUARDIAN) S.KRISHNAKUMAR (MINOR REP BY FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN K.SANKAR ..PETITIONER IN WP NO.13795/10 -Vs. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1.GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, CHIEF SECRETARIAT, PUDUCHERRY – 605 001. 2.CENTRALISED ADMISSION COMMITTEE, REP. BY ITS CONVENER, CENTAC, PONDICHERRY ENGINEERING COLLEGE CAMPUS, PUDUCHERRY – 605 014. 3.MOVISHA R3 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 03.08.2010 IN M.P.NO.2 OF 2010 4.PARENT TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, I.K.KUMARAN GOVT. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, MR.T.M.SUDHAKARAN, PANDAKKAL, MAHE. .. RESPONDENTS IN W.P.NO.13130/2010 (R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 03.08.2010 IN M.P.NO.3 OF 2010). 1 THE UNION TERRITORY OF PUDUCHERRY REP.BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (EDUCATION) PUDUCHERRY 2 THE CENTRAL ADMISSION COMMITTEE (CENTAC) REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY PONDICHERRY ENGINEERING COLLEGE PUDUCHERRY-605 014 .. RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WP NO.13450/10 1 GOVERNMENT OF PUDHUCHERRY REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (EDUCATION) CHIEF SECRETARIAT (EDUCATION) DEPT. PUDHUCHERRY 2 CENTRALIZED ADMISSION (COMMITTEE (CENTAC) REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN PRINCIPAL SECRETARY/ SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (EDUCATION) GOVT. OF PUDHUCHERRY PUDHUCHERRY .. RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WP 12700 TO 12702/2010 1 GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY REP BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT. EDUCATION DEPT. CHIEF SECRETARIAT PUDUCHERRY https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 CENTRALISED ADMISSION COMMITTEE REP BY ITS CONVENER CENTAC PONDICHERRY ENGINEERING COLLEGE CAMPUS PUDUCHERRY ..RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN WP NO.15274 TO 15227 OF 2010, 16869, 16870/10, RESPONDENTS 1 & 3 IN WP 16277,16278/10 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPT. OF HEALTH GOVT. OF PUDUCHERRY CHIEF SECRETARIAT PUDUCHERRY MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY POCKET 14 SECTOR 8, DWARAKA PHASE I NEW DELHI-110 077 ..RESPONDENTS 2 & 4 IN WP Nos.16277,16278/10 UNION OF TERRITORY OF PUDUCHERRY REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETRARY (EDUCATION) EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF PUDUCHERRY SECRETARIAT PUDUCHERRY. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION PERUNTHALAIVAR CENTURION COMPLEX, KAMARAJAR SALAI, NELLITHOPPE, PUDUCHERRY. THE CONVENOR, CENTAC PONDICHERRY ENGINEERING COLLEGE PUDUCHERRY. ..RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WP 16539/10 MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA SECTOR-8 POCKET-14 DWARKA-1 NEW DELHI-110 077. ..4TH RESPONDENTS IN WP 16539/2010 3rd RESPONDENTS IN WP No.16870/10 1 UNION OF INDIA REP. BY GOVERNMENT OF PONDICHERRY THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. CHIEF SECRETARIAT (EDU) PUDUCHERRY. 2 CENTRALISED ADMISSION COMMITTEE (CENTAC) REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN CENTAC CUM SECRETARY TO GOVT (EDUCATION)GOVERNMENT OF https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ PUDUCHERRY CHIEF SECRETARIAT PUDUCHERRY. 3 THE CONVENOR CENTRALISED ADMISSION COMMITTEE (CENTAC) PONDICHERRY ENGINEERING COLLEGE CAMPUS PUDUCHERRY 605014. ..RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WP 15933,10803 13795/2009 W.P.No.13130/2010: PRAYER : This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Declaration to declare the government order passed by first respondent in G.O.Ms.No.99 dated 10.08.2006 of Chief Secretariat (Education) and subsequent government order by information bulletin issued by the second respondent approved vide G.O.Ms.No.65 dated 21.05.2010 of Chief Secretariat (Education) providing regional reservation for admission to professional degree courses offered by Government sponsored colleges in Union Territory of Puducherry as unconstitutional and violative article 14, 15 & 16 Constitution of India. W.P.No.13450/2010: Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records relating to the provisions as to Special Regional Allocation of Seats in G.O.Ms.No.99 dated 10.8.2006 and G.O.Ms.No.65 dated 21.5.2010 issued by the Chief Secretariat (Education) Government of Union Territory of Puducherry and quash the same as illegal and ultravires of the Constitution of India and further directing the respondents and more particularly the 2nd respondent to consider all eligible students and more particularly Ms.Aarthi Nivedida the daughter of the petitioner for admission to the first year course of different professional courses commencing from the academic year 2010-11 as notified by G.O.Ms.No.65 dated 21.5.2010 Chief Secretariat (Education) Government of Puducherry and administered by CENTAC without applying the Special Regional Allocation of Seats procedure. W.P.No.12700 to 12702/2010: Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ, calling for the records of the respondents in connection with the impugned proceedings issued by the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms. No. 65 Chief Secretariat (Education) Department dated 21.5.2010 and quash the same and to issue directions to the respondents to maintain the status quo prior to the issue of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the said Government Order and to follow the admission guidelines as existed in 2009-10. W.P.No.15274 to 15277/10, 16869, 16870/10:- Writ of declaration declaring the annexure III clause 6 in the Information Bulletin 2010-2011 issued by 2nd respondent as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to consider the petitioners under Special Regional Allocation for Puducherry Region in Government sponsored colleges. W.P.No.16277, 16278/10: Writ of declaration declaring that the G.O.Ms.No.99 dated 10.8.2006 issued by the 1st respondent and declaring clause 5 (1) of the Information Bulletin issued by the 3rd respondent for the academic year 2010-2011 as unconstitutional void and illegal and having violated articles 14 and 15 of the constitution of India. W.P.No.16539/10: Writ of a Certirorarified mandamus, calling Calling for the records relating to G.O.Ms.No.65 dated 21.05.2010 issued by the 1st Respondent and quash Sub Para-2 of Para 5.1.7 thereof and direct the Respondents to admit the Petitioner in MBBS Course in any of the Government Colleges of Puducherry in any of the seats allocated for Puducherry region in UT of Puducherry. W.P.No.15933,10803,13795/2009:- Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned G.O. Ms. No.99 dated 10.08.2006 issued by the 1st respondent and Clause 5.1 of the Information Bulletin 2009- 2010 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to fill up the B.Tech seat on general merit and without reference to regional reservation. For petitioners :Mr.K.M.Vijayan Senior counsel for K.M.Vijayan Associates (in W.P.Nos.13130, 15274 to 15277, 16869, 16870 of 2010, Mr.R.C.PaulKanagaraj (in W.P.No.13450 of 2010) Mr.T.Mohan for Mr.M.Ravi (in W.P.No.12700 to 12702 of 2010 Mr.Babu Rangasamy (in W.P.No.10803, 13795, 15933 of 2009 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Mr.R.Natarajan (in W.P.Nos.16277 and 16278 of 2010 Mr.P.V.S.Giridhar (in W.P.No.16539 of 2010) For Respondents :Mr.M.Ravindran Addl. Solicitor General of India assisted by Mr.D.Sreenivasan Spl. G.P. (Pondicherry) (and) Mr.R.Muthukumarasamy Senior counsel for Mr.Mr.R.Sureshkumar for impleaded parties COMMON O R D E R THE CHIEF JUSTICE & T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. All these writ petitions raise a common question and therefore they are heard together and disposed of by a common order. 2. These batch of cases could be broadly classified in two groups, those cases challenging the decision of the Government of Puducherry in providing regional reservation for admission to professional decree courses offered by Government sponsored colleges in Union Territory of Puducherry as unconstitutional and violative of Article 14, 15 & 16 of the Constitution of India and other group of cases challenging the Special Regional Allocation of seats for Puducherry, Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam Regions. 3. The petitioner in W.P.No.13130 of 2010 is the Federation of Puducherry Parents-Students Affected by region wise reservation, an association, registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The other writ petitions are by students, who have applied for admission to the professional decree courses for the academic year 2010-11. The case of the petitioners in all these writ petitions could be summarized as follows:- The Union Territory of Puducherry consist of four regions of which Puducherry and Karaikal are situated near Tamil Nadu, Yanam situated near State of Andhra Pradesh and Mahe situated near Kerala State. The Government of Puducherry by G.O.Ms.No.44, dated 05.04.2010, reserved 21 seats for Karaikal region, 7 seats for Mahe region and 7 seats for Yanam region in the engineering colleges in the Union Territory with a condition that the candidates in these three regions should have studied in the respective region for atleast three years continuously including the year in which the candidate appeared for the qualification examination, in order to become eligible to get admitted against the seats reserved for the three regions, the said Government order came into effect from the academic year 2001-02. Subsequently, by another order in G.O.Ms.No.99, dated 10.08.2006, the special allocation in admission to various professional decree courses offered by Puducherry https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Government sponsored colleges, for the candidates of Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam regions was made on percentage basis and was fixed at 18%, 4% and 3% respectively. The Government order also prescribed the criteria to be satisfied for claiming admission under the special regional allocation of seats and the Government order came into effect from the academic year 2007-08. The Government of Puducherry by G.O.Ms.No.58, dated 28.04.2010, constituted a Consultative Committee to review the Regional Reservation on seats reserved in professional decree courses for the candidates of geographically distributed regions of Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam. The Government order also stipulated the composition of the Consultative Committee with the Hon'ble Chief Minister, Puducherry as its Chairman. 4. According to the petitioners all of a sudden, the Government announced that the remaining seats, which is approximately 75% after allocation of seats to Karaikal, Mahe & Yanam regions will be reserved for Puducherry region students only and a Government order to the said effect was issued in G.O.Ms.No.65, dated 21.05.2010, which is reflected in the Information Bulletin (hereinafter referred to "as the Bulletin") published by the Centralized Admission Committee (CENTAC) for admission to professional courses in Union Territory of Puducherry for the year 2010-11. According to the petitioner, the above pattern of reservation restricts the scope of admission to the professional colleges for residents of Puducherry region and a resident of Karaikal, Mahe or Yanam can never compete for more than the seats allotted for their region; that due to the said Government order there is 100% reservation and one of the condition to get the benefit of the said reservation is that the parents of the candidates should have been residing continuously in the Union Territory of Puducherry for atleast for five years and the students should have studied in the same region for the last three years, immediately preceding the qualification examination (including the year of qualification examination). This according to the petitioner is violative of Article 15(4) and 15(5) of the Constitution of India. It is stated that a representation was also given by the petitioner Federation objecting to such reservation, despite such representation since the Government of Puducherry proceeded with the admission process, the petitioners are before this Court challenging G.O.Ms.No.99, dated 10.08.2006 and the consequential Information Bulletin issued by the second respondent approved vide G.O.Ms.No.65, dated 21.05.2010. 5. (i) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the regional reservation is bad in law as there is no constitutional sanction under Article 15(4) and (5) of the Constitution of India that the regional reservation is against the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.Rajendran Vs. State of Madras AIR 1968 SC 1012 and in Minor A. Peeriakaruppan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others 1971 1 SCC https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 38. (ii)It is further contended that by providing regional reservation, the respondents have obliterated the social/communal reservation and in the absence of any approval by the Central Government such reservation is bad in law; that there is no objective standard behind such reservation and 100% regional reservation is constitutional invalid. (iii)Further, it is contended that reservation for other regions is also improper and by pointing out that in the Mahe region the literacy rate is 95.66% in the Census taken during 2001 and there is absolutely no basis for reserving 25% seats for the said region. (iv)The learned Senior counsel by relying upon clause 2.6 of the Information Bulletin published by CENTAC, which gives the domicile criteria of Union Territory of Puducherry, would submit that it has in effect nullified the criteria by introducing clause 6 in Annexure III of the Bulletin and that the certificate required as per clause 6 of Annexure III to claim seats under Puducherry/Karaikal/ Mahe/Yanam regional allocation is inconsistent. The students, who have nativity certificate as required under Clause 2.6 of the bulletin are not considered to be domicile of the area because they do not have a certificate as required under clause 6 of the Annexure III and this is a glaring inconsistency in the bulletin and there was no such condition during the previous year i.e., 2009-10. (v)All that is required to be satisfied to be considered as a domicile of Union Territory of Puducherry is to fulfill any one of the criteria mentioned in sub-clause (a) to (f) of clause 2.6 of the Bulletin and there cannot be any necessity that the candidate should have under-gone academic studies consecutively for three classes in the region to claim seats under regional allocation. Therefore, the learned Senior counsel would submit that the entire process as notified in the Bulletin is illegal and liable to be quashed. 6. The learned counsels appearing for the students in the other writ petitions would contend that the students were not intimated in advance that if they pursue their studies outside Puducherry for two years they would not be considered as domicile of Union Territory of Puducherry is illegal and consequently, the Government order in G.O.Ms.No.99, dated 10.08.2006 has to be held to be bad in law. 7. The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that during the previous years regional reservation was restricted to Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam. Originally the reservation was based on number of seats and subsequently, it was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ made as percentage of seats and in view of the peculiar situation in the Union Territory of Puducherry a uniform pattern cannot be adopted as the regions are distributed and each of the regions is close to a particular state and those regions adopt the Board of Study of the States near to which they are situated. In other words, it is contended that in respect of Mahe region as it is situated close to Kerala State, the Kerala Education Board pattern is adopted, similarly for Yanam, Andhra Pradesh Board pattern is adopted and for Karaikal, the Tamil Nadu Board pattern is adopted. The learned Additional Solicitor General would concede that reservation of 75% for Puducherry region will be deleted from the next year and since the selection process has already commenced for the current year and counseling for admission to medical colleges having been completed, the selection for this year should not be distributed. 8. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the impleaded respondents would submit that the reservation based on domicile or institutional has been permitted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and what is prohibited is reservation based on place of birth. That reservation upto 75% can be made in medical admission based on domicile. It is further submitted that even the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.Rajendran, referred supra, held that territorial classification is not always bad and the decision in P.Rajendran case was subsequently distinguished in Kumari Chitra Ghose Vs. Union of India, 1969 2 SC 228 and N.Vasundra Vs. State of Mysore, 1971 2 SCC 22. By placing heavy reliance on said decisions, the learned Senior counsel would contend that the Court should not interfere with the manner of classification adopted by the State. Further, the learned Senior counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of U.P Vs. Pradip Tandon, AIR 1975 SC 563, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while striking down rural reservation upheld the validity of the reservation for hill area in the State of U.P. Further, it is submitted that the literacy rate is no indication to deny regional reservation, since the area such as Mahe and Yanam are backward areas and there are no medical colleges in the said regions, different languages are spoken and the students study under different Boards of Education. Therefore, the learned Senior counsel would submit that the regional reservation in respect of those three areas of Mahe, Yanam and Karaikal cannot be faulted. It is further submitted that the condition in the Information Bulletin as regards domicile by excluding the candidates who have not undergone their two years of course of study in Pondicherry would be bad in law. 9. The learned counsel for the other writ petitioners while adopting the stand taken by the other learned counsels appearing for the petitioners also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Minor P. Athulya Vs. Deputy Tahsildar (Revenue) Taluk Office, U.T. of Pondicherry and others 2007 (6) MLJ 904 and the decision of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra and Others Vs. Sneha Satyanarayan Agrawal and Others (2008) 15 SCC 353. 10. We have given our careful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 11. Though elaborate submissions have been made on various factual issues, the crux of the controversy lies in a very narrow campus. The Government of Puducherry published the Information Bulletin 2010-2011, prescribing the admission procedure for first year B.Tech, MBBS, BDS and other decree courses for the academic year 2010-11. In these writ petitions, we are concerned about the admissions to the Engineering and Medical Degree Courses. The academic qualification as per clause 2.1 of the bulletin is that the candidates should have passed H.Sc (academic examination) conducted by the Board of Higher Secondary Examination of Tamil Nadu or any other equivalent examination thereto with minimum of 45% / 50% respectively. 12. Clause 2.6 of the bulletin deals with domicile criteria for Union Territory of Puducherry. For better appreciation, the same is extracted herein below:- "2.6 Domicile criteria for UT of Puducherry Candidates belonging to the UT of Puducherry are eligible for admission to all the degree courses. A candidate is considered to belong to the UT of Puducherry, if he/she satisfies at least one of the following domicile criteria: a) Those candidates or whose parents have been residing continuously in the UT of Puducherry for at least 5 years immediately preceding the date of application. b) Those who have passed SSCL/H.Sc., or any other public examination and for that purpose had undergone academic studies continuously for 5 successive classes immediately preceding the qualifying examination (including the year of the qualifying examination) in recognised educational institution /(s) located in the UT of Puducherry and having their residence in the UT of Puducherry for 5 years continuously during that period. c) Children of Central Government Servants / Defence Personnel / Central Paramilitary Forces / Employees of Public Sector Undertakings wholly or substantially run either by the Central Government or by the UT of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Puducherry Government, posted and serving in the UT of Puducherry for at least a minimum period of one year prior to the stipulated last date of submission of application for the course. d) Children of Natives of UT of Puducherry who have declared any place in the UT of Puducherry as their home town and so certified by their respective Heads of Office. Note: Nativity Certificate in the prescribed format has to be enclosed along with the admission application for the course. e) Children of Defence Personnel who were killed or disabled in action and children of Central Government Servants/ UT of Puducherry Government Servants/ Defence Personnel/ Employees of Public Sector undertakings as referred in category (c) who have died while in service, in the UT of Puducherry. f) French National residing in the UT of Puducherry and covered by the terms of the "Treaty of Cession" shall be treated on par with the candidates who produce the prescribed residence certificate for the UT of Puducherry. However, such French Nationals will not be required to produce residence certificate. Instead they should produce a 'certificate of registration' issued for this purpose from the French Consulate, Puducherry. Note: Children of these French Nationals shall not be considered for admission under the quota of non-residents. 13. Clause 5.0 of the bulletin gives the details of reservation and special allocation and the following tabulated statement would be relevant:- 5.0 Details of Reservation and Special Allocation 5.1 For UT of Puducherry Candidates in Government Sponsored Colleges Reservation in admission to various degree courses offered by Government Sponsored Colleges for Puducherry UT candidates belonging to different categories are given below: Categories Percentage of Reservation Scheduled Caste (SC) – Applicable to Origin SC Candidates only 16 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Categories Percentage of Reservation Most Backward Classes(MBC) and Other Backward Classes (OBC) (a ratio of 60:40 as the quantum of reservation for MBC and OBC respectively, out of the overall reservation of 33%) 33(20+13) Children/Grand Children of Freedom Fighter (FF)* 4 Physically Handicapped (PH)* 3 Wards of Ex-Servicemen* 1/3/10 Candidates who are excellent in Sports(SP)* 1 Special Allocation Category (@) Number of Seats B.Tech BDS BVSc & AH B.Phar m Bsc (Nursin g) BPT BSc (MLT) Candidates from Puducherry Region 402 22 23 38 51 9 6 Candidates from Karaikal Region 96 5 5 9 12 3 2 Candidates from Mahe Region 21 1 1 2 3 1 1 Candidates from Yanam Region 16 1 1 2 2 1 1 + For MBBS 1% and for all the other courses 3% of seats are reserved. * Horizontal Reservation: Seats reserved /allocated under these categories will become operational, only if, the minimum member of seats earmarked for each of these categories are not filled up, under normal process of selection in any category. @ As per the Government Orders in force. 14. By referring to the above details of reservation and special allocation, it is contended that there is 100% reservation and the candidates from the other region are shut out from applying for under the said quota and the same is illegal and violative of Article 15(4) of the Constitution of India. As seen from the above chart, the respondents have applied the vertical reservation by reserving 16% for Schedule Caste, 20% for Most Backward Classes, 13% for Other Backward Classes (20%+13%=33%) and adopted the horizontal reservation by fixing 4% for Children/Grand Children of Freedom Fighter, 3% for a Physically Handicapped, 1/3 % for Wards of Ex- Servicemen and 1% for Candidates who are excellent in Sports. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 15. Apart from the above, regional allocations have been provided to the four regions namely, Puducherry region, Karaikal region, Mahe region and Yanam region.