IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14478 of 2008 Between: Chary Sushma D/o Ch. Malusuru since Minor rep by her natural father Sri Ch. Malusuru, S/o Guravaiah aged 38 years R/o sublaid Village, Tirumalapyapalem (M), Khammam district. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Secretary, Higher Education Secretarait, Hyderabad. 2 The Chairman/Commissioner Commissionerate of Higher Education Saifabad, Hyderasbad. 3 Rajiv Gandhi university of Knowledge, Technologies (RGUKT) rep by its Dean, Besides Telephone bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad 4 A.P. III.T Basara rep by its Dean, basara, Adilabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in adopting a non- transparent admission procedure and in not selecting and issuing admission to the petitioner on the basis of her merit in SSC Public Eaxamination-2008 against SC as well as Women category quota in the Hanamkonda Mandal, seats or against the open statewide category as well as statewide SC reservation quota as totally illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to admit the petitioner to IIIT Courses for the academic year 2008-09 in any of the 3 Universities in A.P. on the basis of her merit in SSC Public Examination-2008 and to pass such other order or further orders in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.LAKSHMA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents.: GP FOR INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY The Court made the following : O R D E R : This Writ Petition has been ﬁled by Chary Sushma assailing the action of the respondents in not including her name in the selected list for admission into IIIT course for the academic year 2008-2009 in Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies (RGUKT)-3rd respondent. 2. Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies (for short University) has been established as an autonomous organization by Government of Andhra Pradesh to educate the gifted rural students who may not have the beneﬁt of special coaching classes. The selection of students for admission into IIIT course in the University is based on the Local Best Model at the Mandal level. There are 6000 seats in all the three institutions of the University. 85 percent of the seats are reserved for students from rural schools of Andhra Pradesh, 15% seats are earmarked for meritorious students at State level. 900 seats are proposed to be ﬁlled up on the basis of statewide merit. 486 seats from open category, 135 from SC category, and 54 from ST category, 63 seats from BC-A category, 90 seats from BC-B category, 9 seats from BC-C category and 63 seats from BC- D category. The remaining 5100 seats are earmarked for rural students and these seats are allotted to 23 districts taking the population of the district as criteria. Accordingly, 228 seats have bee n allotted to Warangal District. 3. The petitioner studied SSC in Vignan (EM) High School, Balasamudram, Hanamkonda Mandal, Warangal District. She appeared for SSC examination with Roll No.1049355. She secured 550 marks out of 600. She claims to be the top student in the school and therefore, non-inclusion of her name in the selected list for admission into IIIT Course in 3rd respondent- University is illegal and arbitrary. For better understanding of the grievance of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to refer paras.3 and 4 of the writ affidavit and they are thus: “3. I respectfully submit that the petitioner is belonging to SC Community. She has studied SSC from Vignan (EM) High School, Balasamudram, Hanamkonda Mandal, Warangal District and appeared for the SSC regular public examination held in the month of March, 2008 with Hall Ticket No.1049355. She has secured 550 marks out of 600 i.e. 92% in aggregate. Further she has secured 100/100 in both mathematics and General Science. She was expecting that she will get a seat in IIIT in the ensuing admissions for the academic year 2009-09 under the government sponsored Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technology Mission. It was published in the news papers that the government has allotted about 6,300 total number of seats available in the state against the 3 IIITs and as per the said notiﬁcation, district-wise allotments, against the Warangal District, 228 seats were shown as allotted out of which 123 were shown against the open and 34 against the SC category and the rest against other categories. It is also mentioned therein that a total of 900 seats were allotted against the statewide merit quota in which again 135 was allotted to SC Category. It is mentioned therein that 33% reservation in favour of women candidates is being implemented. 4. I submit that since the petitioner has secured 550 out of 600 marks i.e., 92% in aggregate and 100/100 in both the Mathematics and General Science and being a women candidate and belonging to SC community she has every reason and expectation that she would be admitted to IIIT under any of the category quota like open statewide merit against SC quota or against the women quota or against the 85% rural reservation or 15% open under the Mandal reservation. Since the entire admission process was done without any notiﬁcation or on the basis of applications or on the basis of publishing merit list, the petitioner has to wait till the full information is known. The Respondents have put a list of 14 candidates in Hanamkonda Mandal in ‘Saakshi’ website stated to be under the statewide 15% open category and the merit of the candidates and the marks obtained by them were not disclosed. The list of other candidates was not published. The petitioner’s name and Hall Ticket No. did not ﬁgure in the said list of 14 candidates or under any other category. On the same day i.e. on 8.6.2008 the petitioner has made a representation to the 3rd respondent and requested to do justice by providing the admission by giving the particulars of her merit in SSC public examination, March, 2008 enclosing the necessary certificates.” 4. Rule nisi came to be issued on 08-07-2008. 5. The respondents entered appearance and ﬁled their counter aﬃdavit. The admission procedure has been detailed in the counter affidavit, which reads as under: Admission Procedure: 1. Admission to each constituent institute of this University will be after passing Secondary School Certiﬁcate (Tenth Standard) Examination in their ﬁrst attempt in that academic year from the State of A.P. 2. The total intake of the students from Andhra Pradesh will be 6000 at the rate of 2000 per each institute at Basara, Idupulapaya and Nuzivedu. 3. There will be no entrance examination and admission will be strictly based on student’s performance in the SSC examination. 4. Out of the total number of seats, 15 % of seats (as per the Presidential Order),i.e. 300 seats per institute will be open for state level toppers irrespective of their region, rural/urban background, category etc., while respecting the reservation norms. 5. In order to promote national integration and promote diversity, about 100 seats per institute (over and above 2000) seats will be open for other state students and admission will be on the basis of their combined merit in the State Board/AIEEE and interview. Preference will be given to the students coming from rural areas of the country. 6. For 85% of the seats, a region wise allocation will be as per the provisions of Presidential Order and based on the Census 2001. Accordingly, the region wise allocation is as follows: Coastal Andhra-42%, Rayalaseema-22 % and Telangana-36 %. 7. The region wise allocation will be proportionately distributed among the districts and further among Rural Mandals as per the share of their population vis-à-vis the district based on the 2001 census. The Tables below show the seat allocation by region and by district for each reservation category. 8. Seats in the district will be divided amongst all educational institutes (government/local bodies, aided and private) located in rural mandals subject to the condition that not more than one student from each category will be selected per school. 9. The category wise reservation of seats will be BC-25%, SC-15%, ST-6% and Open-54 %. BC category will be further subdivided into subcategories as per Government Order, 33 percent of the seats in each category will be reserved for women candidates. 10. Rural Mandal is taken as a unit in selection of suitable candidates. 11. Assignments to Mandals may often lead to fractional seats. These fractions are added with other neighbouring Mandals until a single seat can be allotted to a group of Mandals. 12. The top student from each school in a rural mandal is selected. The best student is deﬁned to be the top student in more subjects than his/her classmates in the same school. 13. The selection of best student is based on the principle of grading on the curve. The principle of grading on the curve works as follows: The top 3% of the students in each school in a given subject is given Grade A+ (4 points); the next 7% is given Grade A (3 points), the next 10% is given Grade A(2 points), and the next 30% is given a Grade B (1 point). A cumulative Grade Point Score is calculated by adding the scores for all the subjects for each student in every school. 14. The Grade Point Score for all the students in the State is computed. The State wide Merit List candidates are selected representing the best students in each reservation category across the State. 15. When two or more students are the best students in the same number of subjects, then a tie-breaking procedure is applied as follows: (maximum points a student can get is 24). We ﬁrst select students who have the maximum number of subjects with 4 points). i) If there is more than 1 student who has the maximum number of subjects with 4 points, e.g., 2 students with 4 points in three subjects, then we break this tie by selecting the one with maximum Grade Point Score. ii) If there is further tie, that is they have same number of subjects with 4 points and Grade Point Score, e.g., 4 points in three subjects and 3 points in 1 subject, then we select the one with highest number of marks in English. iii) If there is further tie, then we select the one with highest number of marks in Mathematics. iv) If there is further tie, then we select the one with highest number of marks in Sciences. v) If there is further tie, then we select the one with highest number of total marks., vi) If there is a further tie, the older student (in age) will be selected. 16. After 900 students for the State-wide Merit list are identiﬁed, we proceed with the allocation of the remaining 85% of the seats. First, we identify the top student in each school within the Mandal, using the above tie breaking procedure where needed. From the top students in each school in the Mandal, the best students in the Mandal are selected based on Grade Point Score procedure as before. After the open category candidates are identiﬁed, selection is made in each reservation category based on merit within the category. Students are compared using the same criteria, i.e., one or more students with the largest number of A+s are selected (no more than one per school) based on number of seats assigned to the mandal, again using the tie breaking procedure, if necessary. At most 4 candidates, one each in OC, BC, SC and ST, can be selected from any given school. 17. The unselected best candidates in a mandal in each category will be added to a waitlist to be used in case a selected candidate does not apply. 6. Respondents also ﬁled additional counter-aﬃdavit. It is stated in the additional counter-aﬃdavit that the petitioner is not top student in Hanamkonda mandal under SC category. It is further stated that one Gangarapu Spandana is the top student under SC category. The grade points score secured by the petitioner and Gangarapu Spandana have been detailed in the additional counter-aﬃdavit. Para.3 of the additional counter- affidavit needs to be noted and it is thus: “3. It is submitted that as per the information forwarded by the Board of Secondary Education, the Writ Petitioner belongs to SC category from Hanumakonda Mandal of arangal District is a single Mandal group, since the number of seats available in the SC category in Hanumakonda is ONE. Where as Spandana from Navodaya Vidhyanikethan High School from same Mandal belongs to SC category got 23 grade points and “FIVE A+” and she was selected. Thus, the petitioner gets less grade points than Spandana. The following data relating to the petitioner and the selected candidate with reference to marks in all subjects and grade points are given below: Chary Sushma: (Roll No.1049355) Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 93 94 76 100 100 87 550 Grade Points 1 3 1 4 4 0 13 Gangarapu Spandana: (Roll No.1037441) Subjects L1 L2 L3 MA SC SO TOT Marks 85 71 77 84 79 80 476 Grade Points 4 3 4 4 4 4 23 Thus, the above referred student though belong to Hanumakonda Mandal got selected based on the Grading on the curve principle in diﬀerent categories and the contention of the petitioner that she is more meritorious is factually incorrect.” 7. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Information and Technology appearing for the respondents. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner secured 550 marks out of 600 marks and therefore, she is the top student in the Mandal and non- inclusion of her name in the selection list for admission into IIIT course for the academic year 2008-2009 is arbitrary and illegal. 9. Learned Government Pleader for Information and Technology appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner is not the top student in the Hanumakonda Mandal under SC category. The learned Government Pleader also refers the grade points score secured by the petitioner and Gangarapu Spandana. 10. The admission procedure is very clear with regard to the selection of top student in the school. Selection of top student in the school is based on the principle of grading on the curve. The top 3% of the students in each school in a given subject is given Grade A+ (4 points); the next 7% is given Grade A (3 points), the next 10% is given Grade A(2 points), and the next 30% is given a Grade B (1 point). A cumulative Grade Point Score is calculated by adding the score of all the subjects for each student in every school. 11. As per the particulars furnished by the respondents in the additional counter-aﬃdavit, the petitioner is not the top student in Hanumakonda Mandal under SC category. She secured “A+” in two subjects and whereas Gangarapu Spandana secured “A+” in ﬁve subjects. The total grade points score secured by the petitioner is 13 and whereas Gangarapu Spandana secured 23 grade points score. The learned Government Pleader also placed on record the marks secured by the students in the school, where the petitioner studied. Following the admission procedure, the petitioner secured “A+” only in two subjects and therefore, she is not the top student in the school, in which case, the contention of the petitioner that she is the top student in the Mandal level under SC category has no substance. The 3rd respondent University is justiﬁed in not including the name of the petitioner in the selected list for admission into IIIT Course for the academic year 2008-2009. 12. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:30th October, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}