CHENNAI: Wondering whether the Centre is indirectly trying to impose its own reservation rule on state government colleges and universities offering centrally sponsored courses, the Madras high court has sought a detailed report from the Centre and the University Grants Commission (UGC) on the issue.
“It appears that the Centre is indirectly pressing the state universities to follow the Centre’s reservation rule for courses it sponsors,” observed Justice B Pugalendhi on Monday.
The court’s concerns pertained to two centrally sponsored MTech courses at Anna University, admission for which was cancelled by the university due to disagreement between the state government and the Centre over the quantum of reservation to be offered to students. While TN government wanted to adopt 69% reservation as per state policy, the Centre insisted on 49.5% ceiling for the quota.
After the university announced cancellation of admission, a student, Chitra, moved the court seeking resumption of admission to MTech Biotechnology and MTech Computational Biology in Anna University. Subsequently, though the university sought to recommence the programmes and the state suggested creation of nine supernumerary seats, the Centre said the Supreme Court-stipulated cut-off date was over. The compromise by Anna University and the Centre came not before Justice Pugalendhi made a loaded query as to whether the Centre funded reservation or the MTech courses.
A Saravanan, Chitra’s counsel, submitted that resumption of admissions was imperative at the moment as quantum of reservation could be argued separately.
On Monday, when the case came up before Justice Pugalendhi, it was submitted by the counsel for All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) that Anna University should have admitted 45 students in the courses before December 31, 2020, and that it was too late now. In response, special government pleader E Manoharan contended that AICTE had no role in the admission to the two courses.
After hearing the submissions, Justice Pugalendhi stated that when the Centre had permitted Anna University to fill the seats, it should have followed the state government’s reservation policy. “What is the necessity for having written to the state seeking clarification on which reservation policy to follow?” Justice Pugalendhi questioned.
To this, the counsel for Centre responded that there are eight institutions across the state that run nine courses it sponsors and said all the institutions have been following Centre’s reservation rule of 49.5% for several years now.
Recording the submissions, the court directed the Centre’s counsel to seek clear instructions on how the Union government could insist on state colleges and universities to follow its rule of reservations and file a response by February 16.