In a significant verdict that underscores the essence of promoting sportsmanship in educational institutions, the Supreme Court of India has struck down a university rule mandating a minimum of 75% marks for students aspiring to secure admission under the sports quota. The rule, which was instituted by Punjab Engineering College (PEC) University of Technology and approved by the Chandigarh High Court, was deemed unconstitutional by the apex court due to its discriminatory nature and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
The ruling, handed down by a bench of justices S Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar, emphasizes the core objective of the sports quota - to nurture and encourage sports talent within the country. The court asserted that the imposition of a stringent 75% eligibility criterion fails to serve this purpose and, in fact, contradicts it. The justices highlighted that the primary intent of the sports quota is to promote sportsmanship, nurture athletes, and ultimately enhance the country's standing in sports at various levels, including state, national, and international competitions, as well as the Olympics.
The court's reasoning further emphasized the crucial role universities play as breeding grounds for future sportspersons who can represent India on various platforms. By setting such a high academic bar for sports quota admission, the court contended, universities risk excluding meritorious sportspersons who might possess extraordinary talent on the field but might not have reached the 75% academic benchmark.
The ruling came in response to a petition filed by Dev Gupta, a student who was denied admission to PEC University of Technology due to failing to meet the 75% academic requirement. The court noted that the imposition of this criterion ran contrary to the purpose of the sports quota, creating an unfair and unequal application of a uniform standard.
Senior Advocate P S Patwalia, who represented the petitioner, argued that this requirement distorted the very essence of the sports quota by expecting sports-oriented applicants to display the same level of academic excellence as those under the general category. He further emphasized that previous instances of admissions via the sports quota did not demand such a high academic benchmark.
Additionally, the court questioned the disparity in treatment between different reserved category seats, highlighting that SC and ST students were expected to meet a 65% cutoff to be eligible for admissions. This discrepancy further demonstrated the discriminatory nature of the 75% requirement.
Picture Source :
