Shreyas Sinha vs West Bengal National University Of Juridical Sciences & Ors

Tapabrata Chakraborty, J

The present writ petition has been preferred inter alia praying for issuance of necessary direction upon the respondents to admit the petitioner in the

B.A LL.B (Hons.) programme in the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (in short, the said University) under the general category

with West Bengal Domicile, in view of the provisions of West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (Amendment) Act, 2018 (in short, the

Amendment Act).

Mr. Sengupta, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner appeared in the Common Law Admission Test-2019 (in

short, CLAT, 2019) organised by the consortium of the National Law Universities on 26th May, 2019. The results were declared on 14th June, 2019

and the petitioner was placed at rank 731 in the All India merit list. In the midst thereof, the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences

Act, 1999 (in short, the said Act of 1999) was amended.

Drawing the attention of this Court to the provisions of the Amendment Act, he contends that the object and purpose of the same is to compulsorily

introduce “at once†provisions towards reservation of seats for the students domiciled in the State of West Bengal. The said University is a

statutory body constituted under the said Act of 1999 and it is bound to follow the mandate contained in Section 4A(3) of the Amendment Act to

reserve at least 30% of the total intake for the students domiciled in the State of West Bengal. Such reservation as directed to be introduced would

bring the petitioner within the zone of consideration for availing admission in the said University. In reply to the petitioner’s queries under the Right

to Information Act, 2005 it has been informed by a memo dated 18th July, 2019 that the University had not implemented the provisions of the

Amendment Act. Along with the said memo, a letter dated 10th July, 2019 of the respondent no.3 has also been supplied wherefrom it appears that

the issue towards reservation in the light of the provisions of the Amendment Act has been intimated to the Vice Chancellor, National Law University,

Odisha with a request to provide the list of students domiciled in the State of West Bengal to be admitted for LL.B and LL.M programmes. From the

said letter it would also be explicit that the B.A/B.Sc. LL.B (Hons.) programme there are 7 seats under general (AI unreserved) category, 2 seats

under SC (AI Scheduled Caste) category and 3 seats under SAP (Specially-Abled Persons) [HORIZONTAL] category. Without even waiting for a

reply, the respondent no.3 had issued a memo dated 18th July, 2019 notifying the candidates detailed in the said memo to confirm the acceptance of

seats. The contents of the memo dated 18th July, 2019 reveal that the authorities of the said University are determined not to give effect to the

provisions of the Amendment Act though clause 18(4)(a) of the schedule under the said Act, 1999 provides that the respondent no.3 shall ensure that

the provisions of the said Act of 1999 and the regulations are duly observed. Let the documents, as produced, be kept on record.

Per contra Mr. Dhar, learned senior advocate appearing for the said University submits that the CLAT examination is conducted by the respondent

no.5 for admission of the students all over the country. The seat matrix and general information pertaining to the said examination was uploaded in the

website way back in the month of January, 2019. The table towards total allocation of seats across the categories was incorporated in the same. On

the basis of such seat allocation the CLAT was conducted. All the seats in the LL.B (Domicile, West Bengal) category have been filled up. In respect

of the remaining vacant seats, the candidates in terms of ranking have been asked to confirm their acceptance of seats. The last candidate who would

be admitted under General (AI unreserved) category, has a rank 262 whereas the rank of the petitioner is 731.

He contends that the examination is over, the final panel has been prepared and the admission process has commenced. The candidates, including the

petitioner, coming within the zone of consideration have already applied for colleges as per their respective preference and the petitioner had also been

allotted a seat in the National Law University, Odisha. In the event 30% of the seats in general category are now directed to be filled up through

candidates under West Bengal Domicile category, as per the Amendment Act, it would encroach upon the seats in the General (All India Unreserved)

category which have already been filled up. The Amendment Act is prospective in nature and cannot be made applicable in respect of admission

process which has already commenced from the month of January, 2019 and the modalities of selection cannot be altered. In support of such

contention, reliance has been placed upon an order passed on 30th May, 2019 in Janhit Abhiyan vs. Union of India (Writ Petition (Civil) No.55/2019)

and upon the judgments in Y.V Rangaiah & Ors. vs. J. Sreenivasa Rao & Ors., reported in (1983) 3 SCC 28 4and State of Rajasthan vs. R. Dayal &

Ors., reported in (1997) 10 SCC 419.

Mr. Bandopadhyay, learned advocate appearing for the State respondents submits that the intent and object of the State is clear from the provisions of

the Amendment Act. It has made provisions towards reservation of seats for candidates domiciled in West Bengal. It is no doubt incumbent upon the

said University to act in terms of the said Amendment Act. However, it also needs to be taken into consideration that the admission process has

already been set in motion. The said process is centralised one and for candidates all over the country and in respect of the Universities under the

respondent no.5.

In reply Mr. Sengupta submits that on a purported plea that the implementation of the provisions of the Amendment Act would cause inconvenience to

the candidates, the authorities cannot deny to comply with the provisions of the Amendment Act moreso when, it is not a case that a procedure has

been defined upon promulgation of rules in exercise of a rule making authority. New provision has been inserted in the statute by way of an

Amendment Act with a provision towards implementation ‘at once’. The language employed in the section does not admit any ambiguity. Law

has to be complied with. The order passed in Janhit Abhiyan (supra) reflects a tentative view and has no manner of application in the present case.

The judgments delivered in the cases of Y.V Rangaiah (supra) and State of Rajasthan (supra) are also distinguishable on facts.

The primary issue which arises for consideration is as to whether the provision of the Amendment Act would apply to the admission process which

had already commenced on the basis of the seat matrix furnished by the Law Universities all over the country much prior to the gazette notification

dated 21st May, 2019. The Amendment Act is prospective in nature. The total number of seats in the said University in the LL.B programme is 150.

All the seats under the West Bengal Domicile category have been filled up. By a letter dated 18th July, 2019, the candidates have been asked to

confirm the acceptance of seats. The rank of the last candidate, who would be admitted under General (AI unreserved) category, is 262 whereas the

rank of the petitioner is 731. The Amendment Act provides that 30% of the total intake has to be reserved for candidates domiciled in the State of

West Bengal. The said 30% constitutes about 34 seats. In the event, the provisions of the Amendment Act are made applicable in the admission

process pertaining to CLAT 2019, which had already commenced, about 30 seats would have to be taken away from the unreserved category and

added to the LL.B (Domicile, W.B) category. This would disrupt the entire admission process. The candidates who have already exercised option and

have been allotted seats in different Universities all over the country, would be seriously prejudiced. The adoption of such a procedure would be

having the effect of alteration of the modalities of the admission process after the same had commenced. In the case of Janhit Abhiyan (supra), the

order has been passed in the backdrop of an almost identical fact situation.

In view thereof, this Court is unable to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by the petitioner and the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties on compliance of all formalities.