NEW DELHI: The Delhi Excessive Courtroom has sought response of the Delhi College on a plea alleging arbitrariness within the “seat sample allocation” adopted for admission to its regulation course this yr.
The petitioner claimed that the candidates belonging to the reserved classes, who secured extra marks than the candidates figuring within the benefit checklist of the overall class, haven’t been moved to the overall class, which is in opposition to the “fundamental concept of reservation” and hinders extra reserved class college students from taking admission.
The petitioner, who had appeared within the LLB entrance examination, contended that he was “in any other case eligible” for securing admission below reserved OBC class (OBC) however was unable to take action on account of such seat allocation.
Justice Vikas Mahajan just lately issued discover to DU on the plea and granted it time to file its response.
The court docket mentioned that any admissions made after December 21 within the LL.B course below the reserved classes shall be topic to the end result of the petition.
“The impugned first admission checklist has excluded reserved class college students (OBC, SC & ST), albeit acquiring marks above the overall cut-off, from taking admissions below the open/unreserved class admission checklist.
This appears to overturn the logic of reservation, because the seat matrix adopted by the respondent college basically prevents reserved class college students from competing within the open quota and consequently hinders extra reserved class college students from making it to the checklist,” the plea mentioned.
“As a basic precept, the open quota/unreserved admission class is open to all classes of scholars whereas, the primary admission checklist of LLB 2022 revealed by the respondent college violates the mentioned precept”, it added.
The plea mentioned the “seat matrix” adopted by DU is bigoted, illegal and manipulative in addition to an “egregious infringement of constitutional rights assured to the reserved class”.
The matter can be heard subsequent on January 23..
Comment here