P.Jeyaram v. Secretary, Selection Committee for MBBS/BDS Course

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 17-07-2009CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDRENWrit Petition No.13616 of 2009P.Jeyaram.. Petitioner.VersusThe Secretary,Selection Committee for MBBS/BDS Course,Chennai-10... Respondent.Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus to direct therespondents to provide one seat in M.B.B.S Course for the academicyear 2009-2010 to the son of the petitioner, namely, J.Arun.For Petitioner : Mr.M.V.VenkataseshanFor Respondent : Ms.Dakshayani Reddy Government AdvocateO R D E RBy consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken upfor final hearing and disposal.2. The petitioner has stated that his son, J.Arun, hadsuccessfully completed the Higher Secondary Examinations, held in themonth of March, 2009. He had secured 132 marks out of 200 marks inPhysics, 154 marks out of 200 marks in Chemistry and 170 marks out of200 marks in Biology. As such, he is eligible to be considered forselection for the M.B.B.S course, for the year 2009-2010, under thefreedom fighters quota, as he is a grandchild of a freedom fighter.It has been stated that the petitioner's father was a freedomfighter, who had died, on 12.11.2007. The petitioner's son, J.Arun,with a cut off mark as 166.50, is ranked at 2472, under the MBC/BCcategory. Therefore, he should be entitled to get one of the threemedical seats reserved under the special category for the children offreedom fighters.3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioneris that the special category of reservation for the children of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ freedom fighters, for admission in the M.B.B.S. Course, should beactually for the grandchildren of freedom fighters, since it would bea redundant provision, as no child of a freedom fighter would be ofthe right age, aspiring to get admitted in M.B.B.S course, at thispoint of time. Therefore, the term "children" should includegrandchildren of freedom fighters. Only then the reservation underthe special category will have a real meaning. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, onthe instructions received by her from the respondent, had denied thecontentions raised on behalf of the petitioner. She had alsosubmitted that "children" would not include grandchildren of freedomfighters. She had submitted that this Court, under similar facts andcircumstances, had passed orders, rejecting the claims made on behalfof the petitioner. 5. In support of the above contentions, the learned counsel hadrelied on a decision of this Court in Sarvanan.T.T. Vs. State ofTamil Nadu (2004(5) CTC 704), wherein, it has been held as follows:"17. It is difficult to accept that the exclusion ofgrandchildren must only be by inadvertance. It is true thatchildren of freedom fighters may not apply for admission inthe medical college because of their age. But the extractfrom the prospectus of this year and last year would showthat this year not only under the caption "Seat Reserved"is the word "grandchildren" removed. It clearly says thatalong with the application there should be documentaryproof that the candidate "is the children of the freedomfighter". Last year, the candidate was required to showthat he/she is "the grandchildren of the freedom fighter".Appendix I makes it clear that the special category is,"children of freedom fighters". Appendix I of last year'sprospectus read "grandchildren of freedom fighters".Therefore, the respondent intended to exclude thegrandchildren. To the question whether any thought wasapplied to the fact that no child of a freedom fighterwould now apply for admission, the answer may be in thenegative. But on that score, a mandamus cannot begranted......"18. The object of creating reservation for childrenof freedom fighters is in acknowledgement of the strugglefaced by the children/dependants of freedom fighters incompeting equally with others. The freedom fighters mighthave been killed, imprisoned, been impoverished and becauseof his/her participation in the struggle, the children mayhave been denied the attention and care given to otherchildren. This is well described in M.Satyanarayana V. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ State of Karnataka, 1986(2) SCC 512, wherein it was held,"Reservations in favour of sons of political sufferersare considered to be belonging to a special category. Thereis rationale behind it. Those who are political sufferersundergo certain disadvantages and pass on suchdisadvantages to their children. They will be in a worseposition than the children of those who are not politicalsufferers for the purpose of taking adequate education,attention, etc. because their parents might have languishedin any prison or might have been deprived of property.Looked at from that point of view, political sufferershould be an identifiable person who could be recognised assuch on certain rational basis. It is, therefore, manifestthat a person to be a political sufferer must have sufferedin any one of the five ways stated in sub-clauses (i) to(v) of clause(b)."These reasons cannot apply to grandchildren or greatgrandchildren. Therefore, if the State takes a decision notto extend the benefit under the special category to "grandchildren and other descendants" it cannot be said to beunreasonable. The fact that no applicant falls under thecategory of children cannot advance the petitioner's case.As a consequence, the State is under no obligation to widenthe net nor can a mandamus be issued. As regards the word"children" in the prospectus, it is plain and clear andtherefore, must be understood to mean only children. Indifferent circumstances, children may be construed to meangrandchildren. But in this case, when the word"grandchildren" in the previous prospectus has beenconsciously removed, we cannot given an inclusive meaningto the word."6. A learned Single Judge of this Court, while dealing with asimilar issue had held, in his order, dated 11.7.2007, inH.U.Prashanth Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu and two others(W.P.No.5851 of 2007), that, for the purpose of interpreting the word"children" it would be dangerous to rely upon the meanings of theword, as found in the dictionaries. As the various dictionaries wouldgive several meanings for the said word, it would depend upon thecontext in which the word is used. The quota of seats reserved forchildren of freedom fighters, in the prospectus for admissions in themedical courses, should be construed in a strict manner, as it is anexception to Article 15 of the Constitution of India. It can only bea horizontal reservation and not a vertical reservation. Therefore,by no stretch of imagination, the grandchildren of freedom fighterscould be considered under the special category of reservation. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counselsappearing for the petitioner, as well as the respondent, and on aperusal of the records available, this Court is of the consideredview that the petitioner has not shown sufficient cause or reason togrant the reliefs, as prayed for by the petitioner, in the presentwrit petition. Since the provision of certain seats for the specialcategories is an exception to Article 15 of the Constitution ofIndia, it should be construed in a strict sense. As held by thisCourt, in the cases cited supra, the phrase "children of freedomfighters" cannot be construed to include grandchildren of freedomfighters. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is liable tobe dismissed, as it is devoid of merits. Hence, it stands dismissed.No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarcshToThe Secretary,Selection Committee for MBBS/BDS Course,Chennai-10.1 cc To Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan, Advocate, SR.320251 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.32271Writ Petition No.13616 of 2009MA(CO)PMK.12.8.2009.