15, 17 & 18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7068/2008 NEERAJ KUMAR & ORS. Petitioners Tlirough l^r. Daiyan Hussain, Advocate. versus COLLEGEOF ARTS & ORS. Respondents Through l^r. i^lohinderRupal & l^r. Amar Jyoti Srivastava, Advocates for Delhi University. I^r. Sanjay Katyal, Advocate for UOI. Mohd. Sajid, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. + W.P.(C) 8258/2008 SHRI PONNIAIVI CHANDRAN THROUGH HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN Petitioner Through l^r. V.K. Biju, Advocate. versus COLLEGE OF ARTS & ORS. Respondents Through l^r. Mohinder Rupal & Mr. Amar Jyoti Srivastava, Advocates for Delhi University. Mr. Sanjay Katyal, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Rohit Madan, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1, 2&4. Ms. Manjusa Wadhwa & Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, Advocates for respondent No. 5. + W.P.(C) 8566/2008 LALBAHADUR SINGH & ORS. Petitioners Through Mr. V.K. Biju, Advocate. versus Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified COLLEGE OF ARTS THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL & ORS. .. Respondents Through Mr. Mohinder Rupal & Mr. Amar Jyoti Srivastava, Advocates for Delhi University. Mr. Sanjay Katyal, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1, 2 &4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA ORDER % 22.04.2009 Admit. 1. With the consent of the parties, the matters are taken up for final disposal. 2. In W.P. (C) No. 7068/2008, the petitioners, viz. Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Mr. Mohit Kumar Panchal, Mr. Abhishek Narayan and Mr. Shardanand Gupta belonging to Other Backward Classes (OBC) had sought admission for studying and obtaining degree in Bachelor of Fine Arts. In W.P. (C) / No. 8258/2008, the petitioner Mr. Navaneeth J.C. had sought admission for obtaining degree in Bachelorof Fine Arts under OBC category. In W.P. (C) No. 8566/2008, the petitioners-Mr. Lalbahadur Singh & Mr. Sunil Bindhani had sought admission to obtain degree in Master of Fine Arts under OBC category. 3. The petitioners had relied upon the prospectus in which it was stated that 5% of intake seats are reserved exclusively for OBC 4 i -7 candidates. It is admitted case of the respondents including the college that the petitioners were selected for admission with the respective courses as OBC candidates as they had obtained merit ranks in the said category. Normally, there was no difficulty for the petitioner to be admitted but due to lack of communication and difference of opinion between Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Union of India, the requisite final ordinance for reservation in OBC category in a phased manner could not be finalized and issued. The Governmentof National Capital Territory of Delhi in their affidavit has stated that it was decided that 5% extra seats over and above the sanctioned seats may be providedto OBC candidates and, therefore, the Collegeof Arts had issued the necessary prospectus incorporating the said reservation. Union of India in their affidavit has pointed out that the proposal for reservation of seats to OBC candidates by way of enhancement of seats was examined in depth but there was/is difference of opinion whether 27% reservation to OBC candidates should be spread over three years or five years. The requisitefinal ordinance has not been issued. Affidavitfiled on behalf of respondent No. 5- Union of India sets out the details of how the files and the issue has been examined both at the level of Union of India and at the level of Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi but without final outcome. 4. As far as the present petitioners are concerned, by an interim order V- % they were directed to be admitted and have been studying in the College of Arts for last eight months. Even as of today, Union of India and Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi have not been able to finalize the ordinance because they have not been able to decide whether the reservation in phased manner should be completed within three years or five years. The petitioners cannot suffer because of the delay and lack of decision, when it is admitted that reservation has to be provided but the only dispute relates to spread over and time. 5. Keeping in view the above facts and the factual position and as the ^ petitionershave already been admitted and have been studying for last several months in the College of Arts, the writ petitions are allowed. The interim order is confirmed. The petitioners will be permitted and allowed to complete the respective courses and appear in the examination. It is, ^ however, clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on whether or not OBC reservation should be mentioned in the prospectus for the next year. The writ petitions are disposed of. DASTI. APRIL 22, 2009 VKR^ SANJIV KHANNA, J.