Delhi High Court
Japji Kaur vs University Of Delhi on 5 December, 2016
$~
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment reserved on: 06th October, 2016
Judgment delivered on: 05th December, 2016
+ W.P.(C) 7109/2016
JAPJI KAUR ..... Petitioner
versus
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Khanna, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vinod Kumar,
Mr. Anirudh Tanwar and Mr.Aminesh Gaba, Advocates.
For the Respondent : Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Mr. Kirant Singh and Ms. Simran
Jeet, Advocates for DU.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking a direction
to the respondents to allow the benefit of Sports Quota to the
petitioner for her admission in MA (Economics) in the year 2016.
2. The petitioner is a sport person engaged in the sport of
Gymnastics. The petitioner qualified in BA (Hons) (Economics) from
the Delhi University and secured 70.88% marks.
3. The petitioner seeks admission in MA (Economics) in Delhi
University. The petitioner appeared in the competition examination
for admission in MA (Economics) held in June, 2016. The petitioner
applied for sport quota benefit as the petitioner claims to have played
for the State and also at the national level.
4. The petitioner claims to have participated in the Gymnastics
competition conducted by the Delhi Olympics Association in the year
2015 and also claims to have represented Delhi in the game of
Gymnastics in National Women Sports Competition, Group-I held at
Ranchi, Jharkhand in the year 2015.
5. Aspiring for admission in MA (Economics), the petitioner as
per schedule of the respondent University went to the designated place
i.e. the multi purposes hall of the University for documents
verification on 21.07.2016. The respondent University held her to be
ineligible for the sport quota and did not permit her to appear in the
fitness test for 22.07.2016 and trials to be held on 25.07.2016.
6. It is contended that the petitioner was informed that she was not
eligible because petitioner had not participated in any Inter College
Competition in Gymnastics during the three years of her graduation. It
is submitted that the petitioner could not participate in any Inter
College Competition in the said three years because no such Inter
College Competition in Gymnastics was held in the entire three years'
period of her graduation.
7. The petitioner represented against the action of the respondent
in holding the petitioner ineligible, contending that no such Inter
College Competition had taken place during the three years' period
under consideration. The petitioner thus impugns the action of the
respondent in refusing to consider the petitioner under the sport
category when the petitioner is not at fault as it is the respondent itself
who did not hold Inter College Competition during the relevant period
of three years.
8. It is contended by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that
there are two separate categories of seats in MA (Economics) i.e.
Direct admission seats and Entrance test seats. The students of Delhi
University are eligible for admission in the direct category seats based
on their result in the graduation examination. The entrance test seats
are to be filled up based on the result of an entrance examination.
Students from all universities including Delhi University are eligible
to appear in the entrance examination, subject to other compliances.
9. There are total 232 seats, out of which 50% (i.e. 116 seats) are
for direct admission and remaining 50% (i.e. 116) are through
entrance test. There are 12 sport category seats, which are
supernumerary seats. The 12 seats are bifurcated with six seats each
in the direct category and the entrance category.
10. It is contended that the marks obtained by a student, seeking
admission in the direct category sport quota, in BA (Economics) have
to be clubbed with the marks obtained in the entrance examination
and certificates plus sport trails and thereafter a merit list is to be
prepared. It is contended that if the marks of the petitioner obtained in
BA (Hons) (Economics), i.e. 70.88, are clubbed with the marks that
the petitioner could have obtained, if the petitioner was permitted to
participate in the sport trials, the petitioner would have qualified for
admission in sports quota.
11. It is contended that other departments/institutions under Delhi
University have displayed bifurcated admission list in the sport quota
for the direct and entrance examination categories. Reference is made
to the admission list of the Delhi School of Economics, Department of
Commerce and Department of Political Science.
12. Per contra, the respondent University has contended that
petitioner is not entitled to seek admission in the sport quota, as the
petitioner is not eligible for the same. It is contended that for
admission in the sport quota, the procedure prescribed is that the
candidates have to appear in an entrance examination and the marks
obtained in the entrance examination is added to the marks computed
as per the sports certificates & physical trials and thereafter it is
determined as to who is eligible for admission.
13. It is contended that there is no bifurcation of the seats in direct/
merit and entrance category in the sport quota. It is contended that the
bifurcation of direct and entrance category is only for the regular seats
and not for the supernumerary seats. It is contended that the procedure
for admission in sports category seats is separate which does not
prescribe or bifurcate in the seats into direct/ merit and entrance
category.
14. It is contended that as per the guidelines for admission, under
the sport quota marking criteria, maximum 75 marks can be allotted
for the sports certificates and maximum 25 marks can be allotted for
the sport trials.
15. It is contended that the petitioner submitted two certificates.
One of the Delhi Olympic Games 2015 and the other certificate for
participation in the National Women Sports Competition held at
Ranchi.
16. With regard to the certificate of the Delhi Olympic Games
2015, it is contended the it is not liable to be considered as the said
event was only a State event and the admission criteria requires
participation at national level.
17. It is further contended that to fall under category (1.a) a
candidate has to secure 1st, 2nd, or 3rd position in Inter College
Tournament and since no Inter College Tournament was held in the
last three years, the petitioner does not fall in the said category.
18. It is further contended that the University had conducted
selection trials, in Gymnastics, of 11 students picked from various
colleges in the University in the year 2014 and 2015 for being selected
for all India Inter University Tournament. The petitioner also
participated in the said selection trials and secured 10th and last i.e.
11th position respectively and thus was not allowed to participate in
the all India University Competition. It is contended that the said trials
were considered as equivalent to Inter College Tournament and since
the petitioner did not secure 1st, 2nd and 3rd position in the trials, the
petitioner cannot claim benefit of the same under category (1.a).
19. It is further contended that the certificate for participation in the
National Women Sports Competition held at Ranchi cannot be relied
upon by the petitioner, as it is not clear whether the event was
recognized by the Indian Olympic Association, which is mandatory to
fall within category (1.b).
20. It is contended that even if the said certificates were to be
considered, the petitioner at best could have secured 30 marks for
certificates and if maximum marks were allocated to the petitioner for
sports trials (i.e. 25 marks) the total score out of 100 would be 55. The
petitioner has secured minus (-)1 in the entrance examination and
accordingly the total out of 200 would have become 54 and the
average percentage marks of the petitioner would be 27%.
21. It is contended that even if the petitioner were to be considered
with the maximum 27%, the marks that the petitioner at best could
have scored, the petitioner would be well below the candidates who
have been selected as the candidate at Sl. No. 12 who was offered
admission had scored 32.83% marks. Candidate ranking 2 i.e. Semanti
Chaudhary did not take admission. Even if that seat were to be
considered, the candidate ranking 13 and 14 had scored 30.67% and
29.22% respectively, which is more than the maximum that the
petitioner could have scored.
22. To resolve the controversy we would need to examine the
Bulletin of Information for Admission to Post Graduate/Master's
Courses (2016 - 2017). The relevant clauses thereof are:
1.2.3. Mode of admission and Seat availability
a) In all the Faculties Departments, except the ones
offering inter-disciplinary or professional courses,
there are two modes of admission for postgraduate
courses:
i. Merit or Direct. 50% of the total intake
shall be filled by direct admission of the
students of the University of Delhi only, on
the basis of merit. This mode is not
available to students from other
Universities.
ii. Entrance: Remaining 50% of the seats
shall be filled though entrance examination
and Interview/Group Discussion, if any.
b) It may again be noted that all the candidates
seeking admission to the postgraduate courses are
required to register online, irrespective of the
mode of intake.
c) Candidates can choose to apply in these two
modes under the following three options: (a) Merit
only, (b) Entrance only, or (c) Merit + Entrance.
d) The seat distribution for each Course under Direct
and Entrance modes is given in Annexure-VI.
The reservation to the prescribed extent shall
apply separately in both the modes (Direct and
Entrance) in compliance with the rules notified by
the University from time to time, and is provided in
Annexure-VI.
e) The Courses having Interview/Group Discussion
(GD) after Entrance test, along with their
weightage are given in Annexure-I.
f) A List of PG/Master's courses offered by various
faculties for online admission process is given in
Annexure-II. It may be noted that certain
Faculties Curses, which are not part of the current
online registration process, are listed in
Annexure-VII.
23. As per clause 1.2.3, there are two modes of admission to post
graduate courses i.e. Merit or Direct and Entrance. 50% of the seats
are to be filled up by Direct Admission from students of University of
Delhi only on the basis of their merit and remaining 50% of the seats
are to be filled up entrance examination and Interview/Group
Discussion, if any.
24. The distribution of seats for each Course under Direct and
Entrance modes is given in Annexure-VI, which also provides the
prescribed reservation and stipulates that it shall apply separately in
both the modes (Direct and Entrance) in accordance with the rules.
25. In MA Economics, the course in which petitioner seeks
admission, the seat distribution and eligibility in Entrance and Merit
category prescribed in Annexure VI is as under:
Course Name: M.A. Economics
Total Seats: 232
Seats Distribution
Exam Type General SC ST OBC TOTAL
Entrance 59 17 9 31 116
Merit 59 17 9 31 116
Eligibility in Entrance Category
Category Id Course Requirements Marks Requirements
1 B.A. (Hons.) Economics 50% or more marks in
of the University of Delhi Aggregate
2 All other Graduates/Post 60% or more marks in
graduate Degrees of aggregate
Delhi University or other
recognized Universities
Eligibility in Merit Category
Category Id Course Requirements Marks Requirements
3 B.A. (Hons.) Economics 50% or more marks in
of the University of Delhi Aggregate
26. The total number of seats in MA Economics is 232 out of
which 116 seats are for Entrance category and 50% are for Merit
Category. The merit category seats are available for being filled up by
students who have qualified BA (Hons) Economics from Delhi
University based on their result in the said examination. The
remaining 50% seats are to be filled up through an entrance
examination and all graduates and post graduates of Delhi University
or other universities are eligible (subject to minimum marks in the
qualifying examination) to appear in the entrance examination. Based
on the result of the entrance examination, the seats are to be filled up.
The candidates, subject to their eligibility, have three options (a) Merit
only, (b) Entrance only, or (c) Merit + Entrance. The students who
have qualified BA (Hons) Economics from Delhi University can
choose any of the three options, other students can choose only the
entrance option.
27. Within these two categories there are reservations for Schedule
Caste, Schedule Tribe and Other Backward Classes. Over and above
these 232 seats in the two categories, there are Supernumerary seats
reserved for (i) Persons with Disability (PwD), (ii) Children/Widows
of the eligible Armed Forces Personnel including Para Military Forces
(CW Category), (iii) Foreign Nationals and (iv) Sports.
28. The Sports Quota seats are stipulated in the Information
Bulletin as under:
"2.5.2. Supernumerary seats
***** ***** *****
2.5.2.4. Sports: Upto 5% of total intake in each
postgraduate course, wherever applicable, may be
offered to the candidates on the basis of Sports in
accordance with the guidelines issued by the University
from time to time. Criteria for admission to the PG
courses on the basis of Sports are given in Annexure-V."
29. Annexure V of the Information Bulletin lays down the criteria
for admission on the basis of sports as under:
"ANNEXURE - V
CRITERIA FOR ADMISSION ON THE BASIS OF
SPORTS TO POSTGRADUATE COURSES
I. Super Category: Direct Admission by the
Department without Trials.
Sportspersons who have participated/represented
the country in the following competition(s):
a. Olympic Games by International Olympic
Committee
b. World Championships under International
Sports Federation (IOA and/or MYAS
recognized/ affiliated Games)
c. Asian Games by Olympic Council of Asia
d. Asian Championships organized by
International Federation of concerned game /
sports (recognized/affiliated by MYAS and / or
IOA.
e. Commonwealth Games, S.A.F Games and Afro
- Asian Games.
f. Paralympic Games (recognized/affiliated by
IOC and/ or MYAS)
II. General Category: Admission by the Department
Based on Sports Trials.
a. Maximum 25 Marks for Sports Trials
b. Maximum 75 Marks for Sports Certificates
(Chart Enclosed)
c. It is essential for the Sportsperson to qualify
any one of the following Fitness Test items for
Archery. Chess and Shooting and any Two of
the following Fitness Test items for other
Games / Sports as per the standard laid down
by the University (for the general fitness).
Strength Standing Broad Jump Three
1.85 mtrs. for Men Attempts
1.35 mtrs. for Women Allowed
Endurance 1000 mts. Run/Walk One Attempt
4.49 min. for Men Allowed
5.49 min. for Women
Speed 50mts Dash One Attempt
7.9 sec. for Men Allowed
8.9 sec. for Women
Note:- The Fitness Test will be conducted by
the Delhi University Sports Council
d. The Delhi University Sports Council shall
videos-graph the Physical Fitness and Sports
Trials.
e. Maximum 25 Marks for Sports Trials includes
skill test, game performance test, game/sports
etc.
f. Test Brief: Test will be briefed by the Expert
before the Trials.
g. Composition of the Sports Admission
Committee
(i) Chairman, DUSC Chairman
(ii) University Director of Physical Convenor
Education
(iii) University Assistant Director/s of Member/s
Physical Education
(iv) Two Physical Education Member/s
Teachers to be nominated by the
Chairman/ Convenor
(v) One Game Expert to be Expert
nominated by the Chairman/
Convenor
Note:
1. Minimum 9 marks is required to be attained
by the sportsperson in Sports Trials for
Sports Admission.
2. Evaluation and Marking shall be done by
the technical hands only.
3. An Undertaking on Judicial Stamp paper of
Rs. 100/- shall be given by the finally
selected candidates at the time of admission
that the candidate will play for the
University, all the years, during the
candidate's Postgraduate Course Study.
Procedures:
1. Sportspersons who have Secured Position/
Participated in International Tournament/
Competition in Individual / Term Event/s as per
Super Category will be given Direct Admission by
the Department and are exempted to appear in the
Department Entrance Test provided they fulfil the
minimum percentage requirement at the time of
filling the Application Form.
2. The Sports Admission Committee of the Delhi
University Sports Council shall screen the
applications, applied under the Sports Category
and conduct the Fitness Test and Sports Trials and
recommended Admission on the basis of Sports to
the concerned Department as per Certificate
Marking Chart enclosed (New Sports Policy
2014).
3. The concerned Department will sent a list of
candidates who have applied under the Sports
Category alongwith copies of Sports Certificates to
the DUSC by the date to be decided by the DUSC.
4. The Number of Seats (Course-wise) to be filled by
the Department under Sports Category should be
communicated well in advance to the DUSC.
5. The level of competency in the Sports will be
determined only of the Sportsperson who has
achieve distinction in Sports during the
candidate's year of study in Undergraduate
Course/s in Sports/Games recognized by AIU and
IOA. Preference will be given to Sports/Games in
which Inter-University Competitions/ Tournaments
are held.
6. The DUSC must keep proper record of the
candidates admitted under Sports category.
7. The candidate as per the candidate's age must be
eligible to participate in Inter-Varsity
Competition/ Tournament for the next two years
and should not be employed Part-Time / Full Time
anywhere.
8. Candidate submitting false/fake certificate will be
debarred from admission to any course in any
Department for two years. If the candidate is
admitted their admission will be cancelled. Such
cases will be notified to all Department.
9. A notification indicating the schedule of
verification and Marking of Physical Fitness, and
Sports Trials will be notified to all the
Department/s by the Delhi University Sports
Council.
10. The admission to the Supernumerary Seats under
the Sports Category be finalized by each
Department i.e. the Marks obtained in Sports
Trials to added to the Marks obtained in
Department Entrance Test and a separate Sports
Merit List be prepared. The Department will then
make Admission as per the Sports Merit List. The
Sports Merit List should be sent to DUSC for
verifying the details and submission of
Undertaking by candidate before depositing fees in
their respective Department/s.
11. There shall be a Grievance Committee for Sports
Admissions, constituted by the Vice Chancellor for
grievances in this respect.
30. The criteria for admission on the basis of sports quota lays
down two categories i.e. Super Category and General Category. The
Super Category is for sports persons who have represented the country
in the specified competitions. General Category admissions are based
on sports trials. Maximum 25 marks are to be awarded for Sports
Trials and 75 marks for sports certificates.
31. The certificates earned by the candidates for participation in
various competitions are to be assigned marked in accordance with the
scheme prescribed. The said scheme is as under:
(Intentionally left blank)
(Intentionally left blank)
(Intentionally left blank)
=======================================================
DELHI UNIVERSITY SPORTS COUNCIL
CERTIFICATE MARKING CRITERIA OUT OF MAXIMUM 75
MARKS
Categor Level of Competition/ Certificate Certificate Marking Criteria Only for Illustration
y Tournament from 75 marks (Maximum) Position
1st 2nd 3rd Participation Participation Progression
of scores for
4th, 3rd, 2nd,
1st
participation
Position and Association 70 60 45+5* All 4 5 pts. 75-73-72-71
1.a participation in of Indian Years 65-63-62-61
Individual Event/ Universities All 3 3 pts. 50-48-47-46
Team Event/s in All Years
India Inter University All 2 2 pts.
Competition Direct Admn. Years
/Tournament Position Only 1 Pt.
2nd and 3rd in North Year
Zone will be given 5
Marks extra for
University of Delhi
players as Bonus
Marks only in
participation
category)
Position and National 45 40 35 30 All 4 5 pts. 50-48-47-46
1.b participation in Sports Years 3 pts. 45-43-42-41
Individual Event/ Federation 2 pts. 40-38-37-36
Team Event/s in /AIU/IOA 1 Pt. 35-33-32-31
Senior/ Junior
National /National
Games /Federation
Cup/Championship/
Other Tournaments at
the National Level
recognized by IOA,
Subject to the
candidates secured I,
II, III position in Inter
College
Tournament(s)
32. As per the procedure prescribed, the Marks obtained in Sports
Trials are to be added to the Marks obtained in Department Entrance
Test. The admission is based on the Sports Merit List prepared by the
cumulative of the two. The admission in the sports quota seats are on
the basis of Sports Trials and entrance tests. Except that the candidates
who have represented India in certain specified competitions are
entitled to direct admission without the necessity of undergoing sports
trials.
33. There is no sub-division of sports quota seats in Merit or Direct
and Entrance Test categories. Unlike the 232 seats, which are
bifurcated 50% for Merit or Direct and 50% for Entrance Test
categories, there is no such bifurcation in the supernumerary Sports
Quota seats. The information Bulletin does not make any such
distinction. Reliance placed by the petitioner on Annexure P - 11 to
contended that the Supernumerary seats are also bifurcated in Direct -
50% and Entrance 50% is misplaced. Annexure P - 11 is an extract of
the Bulletin of Information of the year 2014 - 2015. The Bulletin of
Information for the year 2016 - 2017, with which we are concerned,
does not have any such bifurcation.
34. The contention of the petitioner that there are 6 seats each in the
direct category and the entrance category is not tenable. Further
contention that the marks obtained by a student seeking admission in
the direct category sport quota in BA (Hons) (Economics) have to be
clubbed with the marks obtained in the entrance examination and
certificates plus sport trails and thereafter a merit list is to be prepared
is also not tenable.
35. As noted above, there are total 12 supernumerary sports quota
seats for being filled up on the basis of sports category. There is no
bifurcation in them. The procedure of filling up of the seats
prescribed, stipulates the preparation of a merit list after clubbing the
marks obtained in sports trials and entrance test. The marks obtained
in graduation are not to be taken into account for this purpose.
36. The petitioner has submitted two certificates. With regard to the
certificate of the Delhi Olympic Games 2015, the stand of the Delhi
University is that it is not liable to be considered because the said
event was only a State event and the admission criteria requires
participation at national level. Further, the stand of the University is
that to be eligible under category (1.a), a candidate has to secure 1st,
2nd, or 3rd position in Inter College Tournament and since no Inter
College Tournament was held in the last three years the petitioner
does not fall in that category. Further, the University had conducted
selection trials in Gymnastic of 11 students picked from various
colleges in the University in the year 2014 and 2015 for being selected
for all India Inter University Tournament. Though the petitioner
participated in the said selection trials but secured 10th and last i.e. 11th
position respectively and was not allowed to participate in the all
India University Competition. Those trials were considered as
equivalent to Inter College Tournament and because the petitioner did
not secure 1st, 2nd and 3rd position in the trials, the petitioner is not
entitled to claim benefit under category (1.a).
37. With regard to the certificate for participation in the National
Women Sports Competition held at Ranchi is concerned, the stand of
the University is that it is not clear that the event was recognized by
the Indian Olympic Association, which is mandatory to fall within
category (1.b) and for consideration of the certificate. The University
in its counter affidavit has averred as under:
"15. Be that as it may, and without prejudice to the
above, even if the Petitioner is treated to be falling in
Category I.b by ignoring the above precondition
(Proviso) even then the Petitioner is entitled to maximum
30 marks for alleged participation in National Women
Sports Competitions held in Ranchi for which the
Petitioner claims to have participated as per photocopy
of certificate at page 50 of the Writ Petition. This is the
only purported Certificate on which the Petitioner can
rely to claim to have participated at the National Level
though it is not even borne out if the said event was
recognised by IOA (For which Petitioner is put to strict
proof) which is mandatory to fall within Category I.b. Be
that as it may, be even if the Petitioner is taken to have
secured maximum 25 marks in the sports trial then, her
total marks cannot be more than 54 [30+25+(-
1)=54]/out of 200. This makes the Average % of marks
as 27 % which the Petitioner can score maximum even if
fresh trial is directed by this Hon'ble Court, which
otherwise is not even prayed for herein. The true and
correct copy of the relevant rule and the computation
arrived at is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE
R-2."
(underlining supplied)
38. The Petitioner in the rejoinder affidavit, in answer to paragraph
15 of the counter affidavit, has not responded to the doubts expressed
by the respondent University with regard to admissibility of the
certificate of the National Women Sports Competition held in Ranchi.
The Petitioner in para 15 of the Rejoinder has stated as under:
"15. That the contents of para 15 are misconceived,
wrong and hence denied, except to the extent the same
are matter of record. The calculations, in the absence of
the concerned documents are denied. Having played at
the National level, the petitioner is entitled 30 marks. If
the maximum marks of trial are added to that, sports
quota marks in respect of the respondent comes to 55. If
the same are added to her graduation marks, she
becomes eligible for admission to MA Economics.
Otherwise, also her claim cannot be restricted only in the
category of the admission through entrance examination.
The moot question is that she has been illegally denied
the benefit of sports quota and the respondent cannot
take advantage of its own wrongs. It is important to
mention that the admission in the M.Com is also under
the Delhi School of Economics and the list for admission
in the said course, contains separate categories for merit
and entrance examination for admission in sports quota.
It is therefore, not understood why the benefit of sports
quota is restricted to only entrance examination in
MA(Economics). A list as published for admission in
M.Com. is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure A-
1 to this rejoinder. Similar procedure has been followed
by the respondent University for other postgraduate
courses and the final lists published by the respondent
are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure A-
2(Colly). Thus the stand of the respondent in respect of
admissions in sports quota in MA Economics is arbitrary,
unreasonable and in violation of Article 14 of the
Constitution. To this effect, even clause 10 of Procedure
in Annexure V to the University Bulletin is
unconstitutional being unreasonable and arbitrary. The
petitioner reserves her right to challenge the same."
39. Clearly, the petitioner has not replied to the contention of the
respondent that the certificates of the petitioner are not admissible.
Furthermore the requirement is either "(1.a) Position and
participation in Individual Event/ Team Event/s in All India Inter
University Competition /Tournament Position or (1.b) Position and
participation in Individual Event/ Team Event/s in Senior/ Junior
National /National Games /Federation Cup/Championship/ Other
Tournaments at the National Level recognized by IOA."
40. As noted above, the petitioner has not participated in any All
India Inter University Competition/Tournament, so petitioner is not
covered under category (1.a). With regard to the certificate submitted
by the petitioner for the tournament at Ranchi, the rule requires the
tournament to be recognised by Indian Olympic Association, The
Respondent had raised doubt as to the recognition by Indian Olympic
Association of the tournament in the counter affidavit, which as noted
above has not been responded to by the petitioner. Therefore, the
petitioner is also not covered under category (1.b). Thus, the
certificates of the petitioner cannot be considered.
41. Since the certificates are not admissible, the action of the
respondent in denying the petitioner an opportunity to participate in
the sports trial cannot be faulted.
42. Even if the certificates of the petitioner were considered, the
petitioner at best could have secured 30 marks for certificates and if
maximum marks were allocated to the petitioner for sports trials (i.e.
25 marks) the total score out of 100 would be 55. The petitioner has
secured minus (-)1 in the entrance examination and accordingly the
total out of 200 would have become 54 and the average percentage
marks of the petitioner would be 27%.
43. The 12 Candidates selected by the Respondent for provisional
admission in Sports Category in M.A. (Economics) 2016 - 2017
alongwith their average percentage marks is as under:
S.No Name Certificate Trial Total Entrance Total Aver. Rank
Marks Marks Marks Marks % out of %
1. Pershant Jakhar 71 24 95 14.16 109.2 54.58 1
2. Semanti Choudhury 60 23 83 14.16 97.16 48.58 2
3. Gurmanprit Kaur 61 24 85 3.33 88.33 44.16 3
4. Arun Khatri 47 23 70 16.66 86.66 43.33 4
5. Manika Tomar 45 24 69 16.66 85.66 42.83 5
6. Prerna Praveen 52 23 75 10.00 85.00 42.50 6
7. Sakshi Chauhan 45 23 68 13.33 81.33 40.66 7
8. Tushar Jain 45 24 69 5.83 74.83 37.41 8
9. Sakansh Gupta 45 23 68 5.83 73.83 36.91 9
10. Vijay Singh Bangari 45 22 67 3.33 70.33 35.16 10
11. Vaibhavi Yadav 45 23 68 1.66 69.66 34.83 11
12. Chitveen Kaur 46 23 69 3.33 65.67 32.83 12
44. Since, there are only 12 seats, the Respondent University
declared the list of 12 candidates selected. The candidate ranked 12
had an average score of 32.83%. One of the 12 selected candidates'
i.e. Semanti Chaudhary did not take admission. The scores of the
candidates who ranked 13 and 14 are as under:
S.No Name Certificate Trial Total Entrance Total Aver. Rank
Marks Marks Marks Marks % out of %
13. Atma Prakash 46 22 68 6.66 61.34 30.67
14. Mayank Kundu 30 21 51 6.66 58.66 29.33
45. If the certificate submitted by the petitioner for the tournament
at Ranchi was taken into account and the Petitioner had been
permitted to participate in the sports trial and assuming that she had
scored the maximum marks assigned for trials i.e. 25, the average
scores of the petitioner would have been as under:
S.No Name Certificate Trial Total Entrance Total Aver. Rank
Marks Marks Marks Marks % out of %
Japji Kaur 30 25 55 (-) 1 54.00 27.00
46. It may be noted that none of the selected candidates have been
given the maximum marks of 25 in the sports trials. Even if the best-
case scenario were to be considered for the petitioner, she would have
scored 27.00%, which is less that the 13th and 14th candidate who had
scored 30.67% and 29.33%. It may be noted that admission had been
offered to only 12 candidates and the candidates ranked 13 and 14
have not been offered admission. Even if the petitioner had been
permitted to participate in the trials, the petitioner would not have
qualified for admission under the sports category seat. Since, the
petitioner does not qualify for admission in the sports category, the
action of the respondent in denying admission to the petitioner cannot
be faulted.
47. The contention of the petitioner that since some other
departments under the Respondent University have bifurcated the
sports quota seats in Merit or Direct and Entrance Test categories, the
benefit of the same should also be given to the petitioner, holds no
merit. First of all, as held hereinabove, the rules do not permit
bifurcation of the sports quota seats in Merit/ Direct and Entrance Test
categories. Secondly, even if some other department, by
misinterpreting the rule has bifurcated the seats and granted
admission, the petitioner cannot claim parity and benefit of the same.
It is a settled position of law that no person can claim negative
equality.
48. Guarantee of equality before law, under Article 14 of the
Constitution of India, is a positive concept. It cannot be enforced by a
citizen or court in a negative manner. If an illegality or irregularity has
been committed in favour of any individual or a group of individuals,
others cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court and seek that
the same irregularity or illegality be committed, in so far they are
concerned, on the reasoning that they have been denied the benefits
which have been extended to others although in an irregular or illegal
manner. If such claims were to be enforced, it would amount to
directing to continue and perpetuate an illegality. Before a claim
based on equality can be upheld, it must be established by the
petitioner that his claim being just and legal, has been denied to him,
while it has been extended to others and in this process, there has been
a discrimination.1
49. In view of the above, I find no merit in the petition. The Writ
Petition is dismissed, with no orders as to costs.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
DECEMBER 05, 2016
'rs'
Gursharan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Committee,
(1996) 2 SCC 459
