FACTS:
The constitutional validity of the Constitution (93rd Amendment) Act, 2005 and also the constitutional validity of Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006 were considered and upheld by a Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in Ashoka Kumar Thakur v Union of India.
The petitioner herein made an application in A. K. Thakur alleging that some central educational institutions were interpreting the decision contrary to the law laid down therein and sought the following directions/clarifications:
- that the limit of cut-off marks for admission of students in the OBC quota in Central Educational Institutions be a maximum 10 marks below the cut-off for the general category;
- that all vacant seats in the reserved quota after the seats have been filled in accordance with (a) above shall automatically revert to the general category;
ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION:
This appeal raises a question relating to the implementation of the 27% reservation for other backward classes in Central Educational Institutions under the CEI Act, 2006. The question relates to the meaning of the words “cut-off marks” used in the clarificatory order in P.V. Indiresan & Ors. v Union of India [(2009) 7 SCC 300], in regard to the decision of the Constitution Bench in Ashoka Kumar Thakur v Union of India [(2008) 6 SCC 1].
ARGUMENTS BY THE APPELLANT:
The appellant contended that ‘cut-off marks’ are decided with reference to a merit list of candidates prepared (with reference to the eligibility marks and/or where there is an entrance examination, with reference to the qualifying marks) on the basis of number of seats available in a programme. The marks secured by the last candidate admitted from such merit list to the programme denotes the `cut-off marks’ for admission to that programme.
The appellant submitted that the words “10% below the cut-off marks of general category candidates” would mean 10% below the marks secured by the last candidate admitted under general category. That is if the last candidate admitted under general category had secured 80% marks, and the lowering of minimum marks was 10% for OBCs, then OBC candidates who have secured marks in the band width of 79 to 72 marks (that is 80 less 10%) would alone be entitled to claim admission. This would also mean that until admissions to general category seats are determined and the `cut off’ marks that is the marks secured by the last general category candidate is ascertained, admissions to OBC reservation seats cannot be commenced, as the bandwidth of marks to be possessed by OBC candidates for admission would depend upon the marks secured by the last candidate admitted under general category.
ARGUMENTS BY THE RESPONDENT(S):
The respondents contended that the CEI Act does not stipulate or provide any minimum “cut off marks” for OBC category candidates who are entitled to the benefit of 27% reservation. It was also submitted that there is no mandatory direction either in A K Thakur or Indiresan to fix the cut off marks for the general category or cut off marks for OBC category candidates.
It was further submitted that the words “the maximum cut-off marks for OBCs be 10% below the cut-off marks of general category candidates” in the order would mean that the minimum eligibility marks for general category, can be lowered or reduced by not more than 10% to prescribe the minimum eligibility marks for OBC candidates. That is, if 50% was the minimum eligibility marks for admission to general category seats, the maximum cut off marks for OBC being 10% below the general category candidates, the minimum eligibility marks for OBC cannot be less than 45% (that is 50% minus 10% of 50%).
HELD:
The Apex Court interpreted that the use of the words `cut-off-marks’ in none of the three places in para 2 of the order dated 14.10.2008, refers to the marks secured by the last candidate to be admitted in general category or in any particular category, or to the minimum marks to be possessed by OBC candidates, determined with reference to the marks secured by the last candidate to be admitted under general category.
It further asserted that the order dated 14.10.2008 means that where minimum eligibility marks in the qualifying examinations are prescribed for admission, say as 50% for general category candidates, the minimum eligibility marks for OBCs should not be less than 45% (that is 50 less 10% of 50). The minimum eligibility marks for OBCs can be fixed at any number between 45 and 50, at the discretion of the Institution. Or, where the candidates are required to take an entrance examination and if the qualifying marks in the entrance examination is fixed as 40% for general category candidates, the qualifying marks for OBC candidates should not be less than 36% (that 40 less 10% of 40).