;E^ 01 agpnf e.iqsi]/\[ BJpusjiqa -/PS AP»B.red,3S P^fep POB ^uej^^uai (A^teE^) ooz ^ ^Bt ^ite 4teJtt!& ^itUtt ^Stt^ '^ittjjtt®"Aaz&tfc^e 84~^u. •B-IX \lir" HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PEtITION (C) N0. 7232/2007 PETItIONERS 1. z. •^ ^A &-;^?-'"^' 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Soni Rakhi Bek, aged 23 yegrs, D/o. Shri Alaban Bek;R/o. Vill-Lohati, Lichibagan, P.0.- Namkym, Distt. Ranchi (Jharkhand) Sudhir Kumar yddav, aged 24 years, S/o. Shri Rajendra Prasad Yadav, R/o V.P.O.- Mandhan, The-BehroF, Distt-Alwar (Rajasthan) Salim Mohammad, aged 23 years, S/o. Shri Bhanwaru Khan, R/o. P.0.- Badaydli, Viya- Jasnagar, The-Bhedta City, Distt-Nogqur (RajastlTan) Harendr'd, aged 24 yegrs, S/o. Shri Dhannaram Jat, R7o. Kaletada, PosT-Jhintiya, Via- R iyabad i, The- B hedta City, t> istt. Nagaur (Rajasthan) Pradeep Tete, aged28 years, S/o. Shri LQrentus Tete, R/o. Vill-Bharda Tetdrtoli, Post-Bhardg, Thana-Palkot, Distt.-lSumla (Jharkhand) Budharam Lega, aged 22 years, S/d SHn ' Sitaram, R/o. Vill-Uchiirda, The-Bhedta City, Distt-Nagur (Rajasthan) ^ Annaram, aged 23 years, S/o. Shri baui'Sm, R/o. Main Post-Manaj, The-Bilada, E)istt- Jodhpur'(Rajasthan) -% Laxman Singh, aged 34 years, S/o.^g|ir'i Bhanwar Singh, R/o. Shqhji ka Nohra^ Bl'j!^3i|ia City, Ndgayr (Rajdsthan) . '.' : :"y:^ Abodh Kumar Singh Ashok, aged30 yeargl^., S/o. Shri Kanhaiya Prdsad Singh, R/o. Qu-,| 3125, Sector-XI 'C', Bokaro Steel City^ (Jhar'khand) Daleep Singh Beniwal, aged 28 years, S/p. Shri Keshar Ram Beniwal, R/oV.P.O- B.adet; Via-Tamkor'^&is'tt Jhunjhunu (Rajqsthan) Ashok 6ahlosla'aged 2'! years, S/o; Shri Mald Ram fiahlot, R/o. Lopi-Bari.Paparcity, Oist- Jodhpur (Rajasthan) Suman Kumar, aged 22 years, S/p. Shri Bhanwar Lal, R/o. V. Ppst-Sagoo Bari, Via- Koliya, Distt.-Nagaur(Rajdsthan) Deda Ram Choudhary, aged ' ^3 years, S/o. Shri Jora Ram;R/o. V. PoSt-Rawatsar, Dist- Barmer(Rajasthqn) Choti Kumar Rychela, aged 24 yedrs, S/o. Vill-Barash, Via-Lakshmangarh, Dist- t^ / 'M ^f^tSk •W'SSw S,: w^s!^' ^,.' »'» '^tK l''"l'>?i fv, ^ !ft lvs,^ ^ ' -'...J \^'€ Sikar(RajdSthgn) 15. Kailash Ram Verma, aged 35 years, S/o. Shri Nanu Ram Verma, R/o. V, Post-Begus, Via- Bagaru, &istt-jaipur (Rajasthan) 16. Jagdish Prasad,aged 20 years, S/p. Shri Bhikharam; R/o. V. Post-Agunta, The- Didweana, &istt-Nagaur (Rajqsthan) 17. Kishor Singh, aged 31 years, S/o. Shri Sanwaldan, R/o. Vill-Jalivaddkhurd, Post- Nanah, Via-Pipar, &istt-.Toclhpur (Rajasthan) 18. Pramod Alapia, aged 21 years, 5/0. Shri Hemraj, R/o. V.P.O-Samaspur, Distt- J'hunjhunu(Rajasthan) 19. Manjeet, aged 20 years, S/o. Shri Dharamchand, R/o. V.P.O- Rajward, The- MundawQ, Oistt-Alwar' (Rajasthan) 20. yqgenclra ygdav, agecl 22 yegrs, S/o. Shri Ram Singh, R/o. V.P.O-Khatankhera, The- Behi-or, Distt-Alwdr (Rajdsthan) 21. Ashok Kuamr Meghwal, aged 22 years, S/o. Shri Hukma Ram, R/o; Dhadhasani, Post- Ganthiya, The-Mer-ta City, Distt- Nagaur(Rajasthan) 22. Sharwan Kumar Gpyal, aged 30 years, S/o. Shri Babu Lal 6oyal,R/o. Napasar, The. & Distt-Bikaner (Rajqsthan) 23. 0m Prakash Pal, aged 31 years; S/o. Shri Dudhnath Pal, R/o. M.N. 224,AGC Sesh Colony, Post-Jamul, Distt-Durg (Chhattisgarh) 24. Reema Kumari, aged 22 years, W/o. Shri RajeSh Kumar Patel, R/o. Vill-Tetdriyd, Post- Laheri, P.S.-Kochas, &iStt-Rohtas (Bihar) 25. Suresh Chand, aged 24 years, S/o. Shri Maddndas Vaishnav, R/0. Main Post-Lgdwa, Via-Jasnagor, The-Bhedta City, Distt-Nagaur (Rajasthan) 26. Ramprakash, aged 22 years, S/o. Shri Ramkar'an Jat, R/o. Main PoSt-Falki, The- Bhedta Gity, Distt- Nagaur (Rdjasthan) 27. Rajkumar Sahy, agetl 24 years, S/o. Shri Jayanta Sahu,R/o At-Dholbandh, PO-Bisipali, Via-J'amala, bistt-Bargarh (Rajasthan) 28. Gharu Charan Biswal, aged 34 yedrs, S/o. Shr'i Sagara Biswal, R/o. At-Allpur, P.0.- Pathanta, Via-Bijepur (Orissa) 29. Dharamveer Meel, aged 22 years, S/o. Shri Padam Singh, R/o. SramPost-Dhandhan, The- Fatehpur, Distt- Sikar (Rajasthan) ^s^t"!xvyswfs^^^^^^^^^s^ ^ >;;s» y ^ai^^ tf 30. Poona Ram, gged 28 years, S/o. Shri Purarainn.R/o. V.P.O.- Khakharki, The-Bhedta City, Distt-Nagaur (Rajasthan) 31. Amit Kumar Yadav, aged 23 years, S/o. Shri Pufaram, R/o. V.P.O.-Kliakharki, The-Bhedta City, Distt- Nagaur (Rajasthan) 32. Tejaram, aged 23 years, S/o. Shri Kanheya Lal, R/o. P.O.-Pipar City, Distt-Jodhpur (Rajasthan) 33. [)hdirendra Kumar Padhan, aged 36 Years- S/o Shri Shankar PraSad Padhan, R/o. P.0.- Sharadhcipali, Via-Saisildt, DiStt-Bargarh (Orissa) 34. Bira Swain, aged 31 years, S/o. Shri Jageswar Swain, R/o. Bariha Poli, bistt- Bargarh COfiSsa) 35. SQuclakar Barik, aged 32 years, S/o Bhagadan Barik, R/0. P.O.-Palsapali, Via-Jamla, Distt- Bargarh (Orissa) " 36. Subash ©adatia, qged 25 years, S/o. Shri Baidehi ©adatia, R/o P.O.-Palsapali Via- J^amla, l.>istt-Bargarh( Onssa) 37'. Prafulla Kurnar AAallick, aged 41 years,. S/o Shri Judhistir Mallick,R/o. P.O.-K-Hrkoad, Distt-Nayapacla (Orjssa)' 38. Krishnd Chandra Sahu, qged 30 years, S/o; Shri Bhajan Sahu, R/o. P.O.-Budala, Agalpur, Distt-Balangir (Orissa) 39. Aparna Patra, aged 33 years, D/p. Shn Brajmohan Pdtra, R/o.AT_©ovJnd Tola, P.0.- Dhanupali, Distt-Sambdlpur (Orissa) 40. Ashpk Kum®f Bdrupal, gged 22 years, S/o. Shri RamniwdS Barupal,R7o. V.P.O.-Deliari, The-Jayal,&ist-Nagaur(Rajasthan) : 41. Chandra Ram, aged 34 years, S/6. Shri Changd Ram, R/o. V.P.O- &aloki, Via-Kuchera, Djst- Nagaur (Rajasthan) 42. ©otam Lal Dayma, aged 31 years, S/b. Shri Thavra Dayma, R/o. Kajaliya, P.S.-Anandpuri, Distt-Baswari (Rajasthan) 43. &ov:ind Barik, aged 27 yearS,S/o. Shri Bharda Barik, R/o. Negimundci,Via-Sohela, bistt- Bargarh (Orissa) 44. 6utha Ram, aged 29 years^ S/o. Shri Basti Ram R/o. V.P.O- Diyakalla, Via-Roll, The- Jayal, Oistt-Nagaur (Rajasthan) 45. Jaiveer, aged 24 yedrs, S/o.S/o. Shri 6ugan Ram, R/o. Vill-Hansasdr Baragaon, bistt- Jh unjhuni (Rajast han) ^;?^?^^i?^i"^>i?^^^^S;^^^^^>^i^ \>' n ^ •ji 46. Jalli Sahu, aged 24 years, S/o. Shri Purushottam Sahu,R/o. At. P.O.-Uparbanhal, Distt-Barpangir (Rajasthan) 47. Jitu Ram, aged 27years;S/oShriRidhkaran, R/o. V.P.O-Dehdri, The-Jayal, Distt-Nagaur (Rajasthan) 48. Kamal Kumar, aged 30 years, S/o.Shri Chhabila Ram, R/o V.P.O—J'ogiwada, The- Bhodra, Distt-l-lanUinangarh 49, Manju &oswa|ni, ag«d 22 years, .D/o. Shri Shravan Puri ©oSwdmi,R/o. V.P.O;- Pddukala, Distt-Nagaur (Rajasthart) 50. Pradeep Kumar Sahu,aged 29 years, 5/o. Shri Amrutlal Sahu, R/o. Kotabanhal, Via-R.&.S. Baddmpur, Distt-Bdrgarh (Orissa) J51. PUrna Ram Tnariiya, aged 24 Years. S/o Madan|al, R/o. ArdciS Nagqr, Merta Road, Distt-Nagaur (Rajdsthan) 52. Raju Devi, aged 23;years,D/p, Shri Diyaram Jat, R/o. Civil line near popstoffice, Merta City, Distt-nagaur' CRajBsthdn) 53. Ram Swarup, agedA35 years, S/o. Shri Badri Prasad, R/o. y.P.O.-Chudi AJiTgarh, Distt- J hunj u nii (Rdjasfhan) 54. Rinku Suri, dgecl 30 years, &/o. Shri Sidheshwar' Sinhd, R7o. Qr. Np.2415. Sectpr'- IV 'D', Bokaro Steel City (JRarkhand) 55. Sitaram Kdld, aged^ 21 Years' ?/o. Shri Shimbhu Ram, R/o. y.P.O.-Sandila, Teh-Jayal, Distt-Nagaur (Rajasthan) 56. Siyaram J'akhar, dged 23 years, S/o. Shr'i &hanuwaru Ram Jakhar,R/o. V.P.0- Kheduli, The-Merta City, Djstt-Nagaur (Rojdsthan) 57. Synil Kumar, aged 23 years, S/o. Shri Bajaranj Lal, R/o. Shital, Via-Baragqon, bistt-Jhunjhunu (Rdjasthan) 58. Surendra, aged 24 years, S/o. Shri Ram jeevan, R/o. V.P.O-Ratanga, The-Jayal, Distt-Nagaur (Rajasthan) 59. Sushlna Tandi, aged 26 years, D/o. Shr-i Tgpneshwar Tandi,Ryo.Kyntapli, P.0- Purena, Vill-Pada pur; bistt-Bargqrh (Or-issa) 60. Upendra Kymar, 'aged 29 years, S/o.Shri Ramprasad ydday,R/o. Vill-Pyrhe, P.O-Karvi, Manjhion, Distt-Gharwa (Rajasthan) Ver'sus RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chlldttisgarh thFbugK the Secretary, Ministry of School EducQtion, 6ovt. of Chhattisgar'h, Mantr'alaya, Raipur «!" 2. Director, State Council for Education, Sovt. of Chhattisgarh, AAantralaya, Raipur (C.6.) 3. Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur through the Registrar, Raipur (C.6.) PETITIONER r\ WRIT PETITION (C) N0.6720/2007 Rungta College of Science and Technology- Through its authorized officer ©urprit Singh &hi|lon, S/o Late Shri 6yan Singh t>hillon, Aged about 33 years, Lecturer, Rungta College of Science and Technology, 6.E. Road, ©anjpara, Durg (C.6.), R/o C/o Dhillon NuFSing Home, Station Road, burg (C.6) Vs. RESPONDENTS A •l PETITIONER State qf ChhQttisgarh through the Secretary, Ministr'y of School Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Raipur. Oireetor, State Council for Education, &ovt. of Chhattisgarh, Mdntralaya, Raipur (C.lS.) Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur through the Registrar, Raipur (C.G.). National Education for Teacher Education- A statutory body of Government of Indja, Western Region Committee- Through its Regional Director; Mqna.s Bhavan, Shycimla Hills, Bhopal (AAP) Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board- Through its Chairman, Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, C/168, Tagore Nagar, Raipur (C.6.) WRIT PETITION fC) N0.7265/2007 Bishwanath PradhaH, S/o Shri Sundanand Pradhan.aged about 26 years, R/o Bramsan Post Talpali, via-R.B.S. Rajboda- Sambal, District Bargarh (Orissa). Vs. RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department of Higher Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Principal, Chhattisgarh Kalyan Safniti PETITIONER Aheri, Djstrict burg (C.6.) 3. Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur &istrict Raipur (C.6.). WRIT PETITION (0 N0.7266/2007 Dhiraj Mohan, S/o Shri Krishna M.ohan Prasad, aged abOut 24 years, R/6 Mohalla Abadhganj, Mission School Road, Post Daltanganj, Distriet Palamu, (Jharkhcind). Vs. RESPON&ENTS T\'\,. PETITIONER 1. State of ChhqttiSgarh Through- Secretary, bepartment of Higher Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Principal, Chhattisgarh Kalyan Samiti Aheri, District t>urg(C.G.) 3. Registr'ar, Pt. Rqvishankar Shukla University, Raipyr Distrjct Raipur (C.6.). WRIT PETITION fC) N0.7374/2007 Radhe Shyam Mandal, S/o Shri Vasydeo Mahto, aged about 30 years, R/o Via <& Post Sudna, near Shambhu gate Gayatri Mandir Road, Sudha, [)istrjct Daltanganj, Palamu (Jharkhand). Vs. RESPONDENTS "T^-/' "^' 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, bepartment of Higher Education, &.K.S. Bhawan, Raipyr, District Raipur (C.©.) 2. Principal, Mahavir Jain Arts and Commerce College, District burg (C.©.) 3. Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur District Raipur (C.6.). WRITPETITION(C) N0.7375/2007 PETTTIONER Lalu Ram Patel,S^o Shri Nangaji Patel, aged about 28 Years' R/o Post Amarpur, Tahsil - Sarad, District Udaypur (RaJasthan) Vs. RESPONbENtS 1. State of Chhdttisgarh Tllrough- Secretary; Department of Higher EdUcation, b.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur(C.e.) Z.Principal, Chhgttisgarh Kalyan Samiti Aheri, District Durg (C.6.) S.Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur bistrict Raipur (C.G.). PETITIQNER WRIT PETITION (0 N0.7264/2007 Prahlad Ram S/o Shri Sunda Ram, aged about 23 years, R/o Post BAdikhatu, Tahsil-Jayal, bistrict Nagaur (Rajasthan) Vs. RESPONDENTS PETITIONER State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department of Higher Education, &.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.6.) Principal, Chhattisgarh Kalyan Samiti Aheri, District Durg (C.6.) Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur District Raipur (C.6-). WRIT PETITION (C) N0.6867/2007 Tanmaya Rana, S/o Shri Sahesh Ram Rana, aged about 21 years, R/o Village <& Post Kurumpuri, Nuwapada, bistrict Nuwapada (Orissa) Vs. RESPONDENT.S PETITIONER 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department of Higher Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, bistrict Raipur (C.6.) 2. Principal, Vignana College of Education, Daldal Sivni Marg, Mova, Raipur, District Raipur (C.6.) 3. Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur &istrict Raipur (C.6.). & WRIT PETITION (C) N0.6866/2007 Sashmita Sahu, t)/o Shri Mahesh Ram Sahu, aged about 20 years, R/o Village <& Post Kurumpuri, Nuwapada, District Nuwapada (Orissa) Vs, RESPONbENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department of Higher Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.6.) 2. Principal, Mahant Laxminaryan _&as^ r r^ •aj College, Gandhi Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.). Present: Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate for the petitioners in W.P. [c] No.7232/07. Mr. Adhil Minhaj, Advocdte for the petitioner in W.P. [c] No.6720/07 and for respondent No.2 in W.P. (C) No.7374/2007. Mr. A.P. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners in W.P. [c] Nos.7265/07, 7266/07, 7374/2007, 7375/07, 7264/07, 6867/07 <& 6866/07. Mr. Vinay Harit, t>y. Advocate Seneral for the State. Mr. Jitendra Pali,Advocates for respondent- Pt. Ravishankar Shukld University, Raipur. Mrs. Renu Kochar, Advocate for respondent-National Council for Teacher Education, Bhopal, Mrs. 1-famida Siddique, Advocdte for respondent- Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Raipur. Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate for respondent No.2 in W.p.[c] No.7375/07. Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2 in W.P. (c) No.6867/07. ORALO RD ER (Passed on 28.3.2008) Per &hirendra Mishra. J; f>r 1. The above petitions have been filed by thestudehts of B.Ed. course, who are pursuing their studies in different educational colleges of the State, as also by Rungta College of Science and Technology and the common questi.on involved for adjudication of these petitions is whether, as per amended Rule 4of the B.Ed.Admission Rulesof 2006^concession of 5% r\. 'sff' <T- ^' extended to the students belonging to the Scheduled caste, scheduled tribe and other backward categdries would be available to all the students irrespectiveof their domicileor it would be available only to the students domicile in the State of Chhdttisgarh. 2. In all these petitionsit is not in dispute that; > the students appeared in the Pre-B.Ed. Entrance Examination conducted by the State Cpuncil for Education Research & Training (for short 'SCERT') through C.©. Professional Examination Board in the month of May-June. 2007; > the candidatesseeking admission should be at least a graduate/postgr'aduate with minimum 507o marks; > the candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe AOther Backward Classes categories are entitled fop relaxation 6f 5%, however, they have to secure minimum 45% marks in the qualifying examihafion; > the petitioners were declared successful in the exarnination and thereafter, they participated in the .eounseling for admission in various colleges pf the ChhattisgaFh conducted in three phases and cohsider'ing the inerit and eligibility of the petitiohers, they were admitted in various colleges and accordingly a certificate of admission was issued to them andsince then they are pursuing their studies after paying the fees for the whole year and are attending the classes regularly from August, 2007. S.Respondent-Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur (for short 'University') vide memo ddted 14.9.2007 addressed to the Director, SCERT communicated that the Students belonging to the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe & Other Backward Classes, who are not doniicile in the Stdte <r ^:r^^S^R^3^^^^^^^^^^!W^S^S^^^^^l <:: '.:1 ( ^'t^ e 10 A' Chhattisgarh and who have not obtdihed 507o in the graduation level, have been admitted in B.Ed. course by extending reservation through eounseling and therefore, the University is not inclined to issue eligibilityCertificate tosuch students. In turn, the Director, SCERT vide his communication dated 22.1Q.2007 addressed to the Principal of the colleges directed that the students, who are desirous of withdrawing their admission on account of refusal by the University to issue them eligibility ceptificate, their admissions should be caneelled dfter r'efunding them admission fee. SCBRT had also iSsuect a press release dated 5.6.2007 notifyingthatas per amended provisions of Rule 4 of the C.G. B.Ed, Aclmission Ryles, 2006 the studenTs belonging t& the SGheduled Cdste, Scheduled Tribe & Other Backwdrd Class categories shall be entitled for reJaxation of 5% of themarks obtained by thetn in the qualifying examindtion and the admission shall be niacle for the year 2007-08 on the bdsis of amended provision. 4. Respondents-State of Chhattisgarh & the Dir'ec't'or, SGERT in their joint return hdve submitted thus;- • that fhe petitioners tielonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Trjbe <& Other Backward cldsses categories were admitted to B.Ed. course after allowing them relaxation of 5% in the 50% minimum eligibility requirement, which as per r'ules, entitled the candidates belonging to the above categories of the State of C.6. only. • Letter .dated 22.10.2007 wasissiiedbythe SGERT with an intention to bail-out the students due to the stand taken by the university in this regard, as the university has refused to grant eligibility certificate in favour' pf such students. 11 ^ ^. "nlt • NCETRules and C.G. B.Ed. AdmissionRules, 2006 provide for relaxationof 57o in the minimum eligibility marks, as per Rules of the State fiovernment, in favour of the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe & Other Backward Classes candidates. • They did not have any objection if the students are permitted to appear in the examination conducted by the University. • Outof total 5153 seats of B.Ed. course available in different colleges of the State, only4888 seats could be filled up after admitting the studentsof Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tn'be <& Other Backward Classes who are residents of out side of the State leaving thereby 265 seats remain vacant. In the year 2007-08 also only 5865 seatscould be filled upout of total 6036 seats even after extending benefit of relaxation to the candidates of the above categories of other States and still 171 seatsare lying vacant, • In the year 2006-07 the University did not take any objection whils granting eligibility certificate to fhe students of the abovecategories of the other StaTes and they appeared in the examination. • The candidates were admitted for the academic session 2007-08 without any objection from the Uniyersity and they are pursuing their studies. • NCTE vide Annexure R-5 has •know decided to lower the minimum percentage of marks beingeligibility Gondition for B.Ed: course from 507o to 45% with effect from the next academic session and therefore, the stand of the University in not issuing eligibility certificate to the studentswho are pursuing their studies in the year 2007-08cannot bejustified. 12 l^ 0.^ -r [5. The stand of the University in the counter affidavit is that the concession allowed by the State of C.6. for the candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe & Other Backward Classes categories would be available to the students of State of C.fionly and not to the students whoare residents of other States in view of the binding judgments of the ConstitUtion Bench of the 1-lon'ble Apex Court in the mdtters of Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao Vs. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College and pthers reported in (1990) 3 SCC 130 <& Action Committee Vs. Unron of India and another reported in(1994) 5 SCC244. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were duly selected for admission to B.Ed. course forthe academic year 2007-08 fffter they appeqred in the entrance examination through. counseling. They have SuccessfullY completed their studies for the whole year. In theyear 2006-07 also students belonging to their categories were admitted and were permitted to participate in the examinatipn without any objection from the University. The university did not raise any objection at the titne of aclmission. N.C.E.T. Rules also provides for relaxation of 5% in the minimum eligibility tnarks, as per rules of the State Sover'nment in favour of the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe <& Other Backward Classes candjdates. They have already reduced eligibility criteria for dll the candidates-to 45% marks in qualifying examination for the next academic session. In these circumstanees th'e petitionerscannot be deprivedof from pursuing their studies Onlyon the ground that concession of 5% is not available to them as they are residents of outside of the State of Chhattisgarh, particularly, in view of the stand taken by the State 6overnment and the fact that theseats arestill availablein the State even after admissions of the petitioners, 1 @ s .£- .^ 13 7. Mr. Jitendra Pali has filed Vakaldtnaina on behalf of the Universjty in number of petitions, however, an application has been filed by the University supported with the affidavit of the RegiStrar of Universjty for permission to change the counsel through Mr. Vinay Pandey, Advocate. 8. Looking to the urgency of the matter and the fact that the examination are scheduled iri the month of April, 2008, interjm order was pdssed on 25.2.2008 dipecting the University to allow the petitioners tp appear in the final examination p-f B.Ed. course wjth stipulatioh that their result Should be deelared only after periTtission from this Coyrt qncl the mdtter was fixed for final hear'ing in the week commencing 24.3.2008. On 25.3.2008 onthepraYerofMr. Pali time up to 28.3.2008 was granted and the matter wds agaih fixed for disposal at motion Stage on 28.3.2008. 9. Though dpplication for change of eounsel has been fjled hy the universify, but Mr. Vinay Pandey, Actvocate did not cause dppearance when the matter wasflnally taken yp on 28.3.2008 for disposal at admissibn stage. 10. Mr. Pali, leffli-hed counsel for the Uniyersity has fileclawritten submission in which it has been mentioned that the stand taken by the University in their return is based on the decrsions pf the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, taking into consideration the decision/stand takeh by the Govet'nment of C.G. relaxing the condition of admission in the State univei-sities and colleges due to preyailing circumStances and for which the State of C.£. would ffiaye jurisdiction to decide the interest of the stydent of the Chhattisgdrh, the University bejng a creature of State of C.© would be obligated to gbide by direction that may be issued by the St^lte under Section 68 of the Ghhattisgarh yishWavidhayalay Adhiniyam,1973. 14 ^ p^ < :^' .A' ll.In thematter' of Marri Chandra- (supra) the petitioner belonging to Scheduled Trjbie and r'esid^nt of Andhra Pradesh applied for admission to the medical college of State of Maharashtra jn the reserved category for Scheduled Tribe, however, he was denied admission bn the basis of the cii-Gular issued by the Sovernment of India, Ministry of Home Affairs which states that Scheduled Caste^A Schedyled Trihe person who has migrated frpm the State ofl&rigrn to some other State fpr the purpose of seeking educatjon, employment etc. will be deemed to be Scheduled CasteA Scheduled Tribes of the State of his origin ahd will be entitled to derive behefits from the Stdte of origin only and not from the State tp which he has migrated. The Constitution Benchof the Hon'ble Apex Court has dismissed the petition observing thus;- SGheduled Gaste dnd Scheduled Tribes belonging to d partjcular area of the Country mu^t be given protection so long as and to the extent they are entitled in order to become equal with others. But equally those who go to other areas should also enSure that they mdke way for the disadvantdged and disabled of that part of the community who suffer from disal3ilities ih Those dreas. Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes say of Andhra Pradesh do require necessary protection as balgnced between other communities. But equally the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes say of Maharashtra in the insTant case, do requir-e protection in the State of Maharashtra, whieh will have to be an balance tb other ...^ •. ,. ....^. communities. This must be the baSK:dpproach to the problem." iz.in thematter'of Action Committee Vs, Unionof India (Suprd) also the State of Mgharashtra denied the benefits to the Scheduted Caste speeified in reldtion to that State to a member of scheduled caste belonging to the Qther statewj »'£ ^:..-: <.. 15 A y upi1' has migrated froinother State to the State of Maharashtra. Writ petifion filed by the petitioner impugni ng the above actionof the State of Maharashtra was also dismissed by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court with the similar observations. l3.In theinstantmatter, the un-controverted facts in the instant matfer that the petitioners who dre Fesidents of other &tate, qppljed far ddmission to B.Ed. course urider the reServed category on the basis of coste certifica't'eissuedto them by their Stat& of origin. They were pspmitted to^^ in the entrdnee e^amination for B.'Ecf. caurse tind after' due coynseling they were gi;ven admission ,in ths B.Ed. cQurse under different reservetd categories by extending them relaxation o'f 5%, which was available to the studehts of reserved cdtegor'i6s as per B.Ed. Admission Rules, 2006 notified by the State- 6overriment. In the year 2006-07 alsostudentsfrom the othetr states belonging to the reserved Gategories were allowed Felaxation of 5% and they are pypsying their studies in various colleges and the Universi^y granted tliem etigiibTli^ certifiGate; 'The N.C.'^.E. has already decided to lower the fflwitnunv percehtage of fflarks being the^^^e^^^^ for the B.Ed. course from 50% to 45% wifh effect from ne.xt academiGSession i.e. 2008-09. l4.The Stdte of Chhattisgarh considering th& fact that out of 5153 seats of B.Ed. courseintlTeyear 2006-07 only 4880 seats could be •filled up evendfter proyiding concessjon to the ^ canclidat^s^ of Scheduled Caste, ^heduled Tpibes & Qther Backward classes of the pther State leaving thereby 265 seats still yacant,$imTlarly, in the year 2007-08 also-outof 6036 avflilable seats only 5865 seatSGouldbefillBdinancl 171 v sedts are stilllyjng vacaht and further considering that N^ET hais lowered the eligjbility conditjon f(3r qdniiss^^ eourse •frdffl 50% to 45%, de&ided to aMow cpneession to^ffie_ :fc, -ter. b t 16 candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes <& Other Backward class categories from the other States. l5.In view of the above un-controverted facts and considering that the State of C.G. &NCET have no objection in extending benefitof reservation to the students of other State alsoin the State of C.Q. and also considering that the petitioners have alr'eady been admitted in B.Ed. course after following due prpcess of admission and they hdve pursued their studies for the academic session 2007-08syccessful|y and inview of the stand taken by the State of C.©.,I amof the opinion thdt the stand of the universjty in not granting eligibility certificafe to the student$of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe & Other Backward Classes categories who are not domicite of the State of Chhattisgarh and are residents of other States on the ground that they are not entitled for reservation is not justified in the facts and circurnstances of the case. l6.In the result the petitions are allowed and the order dated 22.10.2007 passed by the Director, S.C.E.R.T., Raipur asalso the memo dated 14,9.2007 issued by resppndent-Pt. Ravi Shankar Shukla University, Raipur arehereby quashed and the reSpondent-Pt. Ravi