Banarsi Dass vs The Vice-Chancellor, Rohtak University, Rohtak and others

J.M. Tandon, J.—Rohtak University, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as the University), is running a Medical College at Rohtak. The University decided that with effect from the academic session 1977-78, admissions to M.B.B.S. Course in the Medical College will be made through an entrance examination. The total number of seats in the College was limited to 115 but subject to the special orders of the Haryana Government. One seat was decided to be reserved for the children of political sufferers The definition of "political sufferer" recognised or accepted by the Government of India while formulating the Central Pension Scheme for them was decided to be adopted.

Satya Paul is the son of Banarsi Dass petitioner and Kumari Sashi Gupta is former''s daughter. Kumari Sashi Gupta applied for securing admission in the Medical College, Rohtak, in 1977. She took up the entrance examination and qualified for interview for admission under the category "children of political sufferers" Banarsi Dass petitioner obtained a certificate dated August 3 1977, from the Deputy Commissioner, Narnaul, (copy Annexure P/1 (a) to the writ petition), that he was a freedom fighter and recipient of Tamar Patra awarded by the Government of India. University authorities, however, did not admit Kumari Sashi Gupta on the ground that she was not the daughter of a political sufferer. Her claim for admission to M.B.B.S. Course against the reserved seat for "children of political sufferers" on the basis of being the grand daughter of the petitioner (a political sufferer) was not accepted. Ajai Kumar Tehlon, respondent No. 4 who was the son of a political sufferer and had secured comparatively lower percentage of marks than Kumari Sashi Gupta, was admitted to the Course. Banarsi Dass petitioner filed the present writ claiming that the word "child" used in the term "children of political sufferers" also includes grand children and has, therefore, prayed that the admission of Ajai Kumar Tehlson, respondent No. 4, against the seat reserved for children of political sufferers be quashed and a writ of mandamus be issued to the University authorities to admit his grand daughter Kumari Sashi Gupta against that seat.

In the written statement filed on behalf of the Vice Chancellor of the University, it has been averred that Kumari Sashi Gupta being the grand daughter of a political sufferer had no right of admission against the seat reserved for children of political sufferers and the University authorities have rightly interpreted the rules framed by them that the word "child" used in the the term "children of political sufferers" is restricted to first degree descendants and not beyond.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the word "child" is to be interpreted in the context in which it has been used and in the matter of admissions in the Medical College, it cannot be restricted to first degree descendants only. It has further been argued that as the word "child" is capable of two interpretations, it would be equitable to admit wider interpretations and not the narrower one. About the locus standi of the petitioner to file the present writ petition, the argument is that being interested in getting his grand daughter admitted in the Medical College, he should be taken as a person aggrieved by the order of the University authorities declining admission to her.

The University authorities, decided to reserve one seat for admission in the Medical College for the children of political sufferers. The University authorties in their letter dated August 6, 1977, (copy annexure P. 2 to the writ petition), addressed to Kumari Sashi Gupta interpreted the word "child" as first degree descendants. Ft is true that the word "child" shall have to be interpreted in the context in which it has been used. The authorities which took the decision to reserve one seat for the children of political sufferers have given their own interpretation of the word "child". Normally, this interpretation given by them should be accepted unless it is perverse or does not fit in the context in which the word has been used. In Edward Bowen and John Keys Thomas and Thomas Lewis 9 Appeal Cases 891, it was held by the house of Lords that the primary sense of the word "children" is issue of the first generation, and that primary sense ought to be adhered to, when there is nothing, or not enough, to displace it".

The word "child" used in the term "children of political sufferers" is either restricted to the first degree descendants or to entire progeny irrespective of the number of degrees. If this word cannot be restricted to the first degree descendants, then it is not possible to restrict it to grand children. After having given my care full thought to this aspect of the matter, I feel reluctant to hold that the word "child" used in the term "children of political sufferers" in the context of admission in the Medical College against one seat can be extended to the entire progeny of political sufferers. It is reasonable to interpret this word in the context in which it has been used to first degree descendants. The similar view taken by the University authorties cannot, therefore, be stamped as perverse or one that does not fit in the context at all.

The right of admission in the Medical College is given to the candidates. Kumari Sashi Gupta applied for admission and she took the entrance examination. The University authorities informed her vide letter dated August 6, 1977 (copy annexure P. 2) that she was not eligible for admission against the reserved seat for the children of political sufferers because her father was not a political sufferer. Under these circumstances, it is doubtful if the petitioner, being the grand father of Kumari Sashi Gupta, can be taken as a person aggrieved competent to file the present writ petition because he is interested in getting his grand daughter admitted in the Medical College.

In the result, the present writ petition fails and in hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.