- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R Miss Kavita vs. Co-ordinator, MDS, University, Ajmer & Anr. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6911/2007 DATE OF ORDER : 20th February, 2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.B.N.Kalla,for the petitioner. Mr.S.G.Ojha, for the respondents. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents that she may be provided admission in B.S.T.C./NTT 2007 Course as per her counseling and she may be allowed to prosecute her studies for the said course. The facts narrated in the writ petition are that the petitioner being a bonafide resident of Sulkhania Bara Tehsil Rajgarh District Churu and having passed the Secondary School Examination in the year 2005 and thereafter Senior Secondary School Examination - 2 - in the year 2007 filled up the form to get admission in two years BSTC course run by the M.D.S.University, Ajmer in the reserved category of OBC. All required documents were produced along with the admission form. According to the petitioner, she had secured 69.08% marks in Senior Secondary School Examination. The petitioner was called for counseling vide letter dated 28/9/2007 by the respondent University. In pursuance of said call letter, she appeared before the Co- ordinator of M.D.S.University on 9/10/2007, but she was not granted admission on the ground that respondent University has considered her candidature in General category though the last candidate, who was granted admission in OBC category was having same percentage of marks i.e. 69.08%. For the said denial, the petitioner moved representation to the Co- ordinator, BSTC/NTT Course, 2007, but her grievance was not redressed, therefore, this petition has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that denial of admission to - 3 - the petitioner in two years BSTC course is totally arbitrary and illegal. In the counseling letter dated 28/9/2007 also, the category of petitioner is specifically mentioned as OBC, therefore, petitioner should be given admission as OBC candidate. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that respondents have illegally shifted her form from OBC category to general category knowingly well that she applied as OBC candidate and admission was also granted under this category to a candidate having same percentage of marks. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the action of the respondents for not granting her admission is highly arbitrary, unjust and illegal so also based on malafides. In reply filed by the respondent University, in para no. 8 it is specifically stated that petitioner was declared selected in General Women Category though she applied in OBC category, as evident from Annex.7. It is also stated that petitioner has secured 69.08% marks in senior secondary examination, thus her merit number according to her date of birth - 4 - is 10614 and in the General Women Category of BSTC, last admission was given to one Shweta Rani whose merit number is 10365, who secured 69.54% marks. Further it is submitted that in the OBC category one Kamla Tak was granted admission, who was having 69.08% marks and her date of birth is 10/10/1989, therefore, she was given admission according to her date of birth in OBC Category as per the Rules. In these circumstances, according to the respondents, petitioner in spite of having applied in OBC Category was selected in General Women Category, and she was rightly denied admission as OBC candidate. It is further stated that petitioner was offered admission in NTT Course which is equivalent to BSTC course but she refused to take admission in NTT Course and as per BSTC Admission Rules, copy of which has been placed on record by the respondents, with regard to determination of seniority, it has been specified that while preparing the seniority list, if two or more candidates are having equal marks, a candidate who is elder will be treated as senior and will be given - 5 - admission prior. The Rules further provide that if the marks and age of two students are same then according to Hindi Alphabet, whose name comes first will be treated senior and will be given admission in priority. Therefore, according to the respondents, admission in two years BSTC course was rightly denied to the petitioner. After hearing both the parties, the facts reveal that in this case, admittedly, petitioner applied as OBC candidate and secured 69.08% marks in Senior Secondary School Examination and as per secondary school mark sheet her date of birth is 6th June, 1989. The respondents have granted admission to one Kamla Tak in OBC Category, who also secured 69.08% but her date of birth is 10th October, 1989. Meaning thereby, petitioner is elder than kamla Tak and as per admission Rules, petitioner should have been given admission. In the aforesaid circumstances, when Rules itself provide for granting admission to an elder candidate in the event of two candidates - 6 - securing equal marks then of course as per date of birth, the petitioner, who born on 6/6/1989, as evident from Annex.2, the mark sheet of secondary school examination, is having preferential right over Kamla Tak, whose date of birth is 10th October, 1989 and who has been granted admission in two years B.S.T.C Course. Thus, not granting admission to the petitioner in two years BSTC Course in OBC Category is depriving her from her fundamental right as she is having better right of consideration for admission as per her date of birth. In these circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant admission to the petitioner in two years BSTC Course forth with. No order as to costs. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. Pankaj Baweja