Two graduates of Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University (RMLNLU), Lucknow have successfully challenged the institutional reservation policy as regards the LL.M. programme at Lucknow University..Atul Yadav filed a petition before the Allahabad High Court calling into question an Ordinance passed by the University, by which 80% seats of the LL.M. programme were reserved for law graduates of the University. The matter was argued by Yadav’s fellow RMLNLU grad, Rishabh Kapoor..To substantiate the challenge, the petitioner relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Dr. Pradeep Jain and others vs. Union of India and another [(1984) 3 SCC 654], which held that institutional reservation may be permitted only to a reasonable extent i.e. up to 50% of the total seats..During the course of the hearings, it was also argued that the 80% reservation involved neither a reasonable classification based on intelligible differentia, nor was there a nexus between the classification and the object sought to be achieved..Senior Advocate SP Singh, appearing for the University, argued that it was indeed a reasonable classification, as the reservation was provided so as to secure the interest of the students passed out from the University..He further argued that National Law Universities and other private institutions have a grading system wherein students secure more marks (up to 90%), whereas students of the University generally score 70-75% marks. As a consequence of this, it was contended, law graduates of the University were not able to get admission into other universities..However, Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya held that passing an Ordinance to this effect was not the best way of dealing with the aforementioned issue. It was held,.“…such a problem can easily be sailed over by the University by providing a normalization process of the marks which is a well-known and recognized process of assessment of candidates in such a situation.”.Therefore, the single judge bench struck down the Ordinance, holding,.“The University has also not placed any statistical data to establish the ground taken for defending the impugned Ordinance. No study appears to have been conducted by University before framing the impugned Ordinance, neither any such material has been supplied with the counter affidavit to conclude as to how in absence of grading system to evaluate LL.B Examination is resulting in irreparable disadvantage to Lucknow University Law Graduates.”.Justice Upadhyaya also upheld the Supreme Court’s decisions on the issue of institutional reservation..“I have no doubt that though institutional preference, in the present case, would be permissible in the matter of admission to LL.M. Course to be made available to Lucknow University Law Graduates, however, its extent can be only upto 50% of the total number of seats.”.The judge also directed the University to issue a fresh Ordinance taking into consideration this 50% cap. Since the admission process for the 2016-17 session is already underway, the Court held that the new Ordinance would come into effect from the next academic session..Read the judgment below..Image taken from here.
Two graduates of Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University (RMLNLU), Lucknow have successfully challenged the institutional reservation policy as regards the LL.M. programme at Lucknow University..Atul Yadav filed a petition before the Allahabad High Court calling into question an Ordinance passed by the University, by which 80% seats of the LL.M. programme were reserved for law graduates of the University. The matter was argued by Yadav’s fellow RMLNLU grad, Rishabh Kapoor..To substantiate the challenge, the petitioner relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Dr. Pradeep Jain and others vs. Union of India and another [(1984) 3 SCC 654], which held that institutional reservation may be permitted only to a reasonable extent i.e. up to 50% of the total seats..During the course of the hearings, it was also argued that the 80% reservation involved neither a reasonable classification based on intelligible differentia, nor was there a nexus between the classification and the object sought to be achieved..Senior Advocate SP Singh, appearing for the University, argued that it was indeed a reasonable classification, as the reservation was provided so as to secure the interest of the students passed out from the University..He further argued that National Law Universities and other private institutions have a grading system wherein students secure more marks (up to 90%), whereas students of the University generally score 70-75% marks. As a consequence of this, it was contended, law graduates of the University were not able to get admission into other universities..However, Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya held that passing an Ordinance to this effect was not the best way of dealing with the aforementioned issue. It was held,.“…such a problem can easily be sailed over by the University by providing a normalization process of the marks which is a well-known and recognized process of assessment of candidates in such a situation.”.Therefore, the single judge bench struck down the Ordinance, holding,.“The University has also not placed any statistical data to establish the ground taken for defending the impugned Ordinance. No study appears to have been conducted by University before framing the impugned Ordinance, neither any such material has been supplied with the counter affidavit to conclude as to how in absence of grading system to evaluate LL.B Examination is resulting in irreparable disadvantage to Lucknow University Law Graduates.”.Justice Upadhyaya also upheld the Supreme Court’s decisions on the issue of institutional reservation..“I have no doubt that though institutional preference, in the present case, would be permissible in the matter of admission to LL.M. Course to be made available to Lucknow University Law Graduates, however, its extent can be only upto 50% of the total number of seats.”.The judge also directed the University to issue a fresh Ordinance taking into consideration this 50% cap. Since the admission process for the 2016-17 session is already underway, the Court held that the new Ordinance would come into effect from the next academic session..Read the judgment below..Image taken from here.