Right Of State To Provide Reservations Unaffected By UGC Regulations: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has established that the regulations notified by the University Grants Commission (UGC) that determine qualifications for selection to various posts in universities in a State do not impact the right of the State government to provide reservations for backward classes. 

A Division Bench of Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P stated that it did not see how the UGC Regulations can affect the reservation policy of a State. 

"The right of the State to provide reservation is unaffected by the regulations issued by the UGC which determines the qualifications for selection to a post which is binding on the universities." 

The Court also added that since reservation in appointments to public services in a State depends on the data concerning the representation of particular classes within that State, the reservation will not apply to other States in the country.

"It is trite that Article 16 (4) of the Constitution of India is an enabling provision which enables the State to provide backward classes including Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the reservation in appointments to public services. Such reservation is to be provided on the basis of quantifiable data including the adequacy or inadequacy, as may be of the representation of such classes in government service. Resultantly, such data will vary from State to State and a certification of a particular class as being entitled to reservation in a State cannot ipso facto make it applicable to the other States in the country." 

A Single Judge had dismissed the appellant's plea challenging the appointment of one Muhammed Ismail to the post of Associate Processor in Information Technology at Kannur University. Aggrieved by the same, he moved the Division Bench. 

The appellant contended that Ismail's application could not have been entertained since he is a non-domicile hailing from Karnataka and added that the principle of reservations envisaged under the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules will not permit reservation in favour of non-domicile candidates.

He added that since Ismail was not a native of Kerala and not being certified to be an eligible candidate under the OBC by the State of Kerala, his candidature could not have been considered let alone being selected.

On the other hand, the University argued that as per the 2018 UGC Regulations, direct recruitment for the post of Associate Professor shall be on the basis of merit through an all-India test and that there was no bar for a Muslim candidate from any State in India to participate in the selection process. The respondents added that Ismail, though a native of Karnataka, belongs to the Muslim community notified as a backward class in Kerala as well as in Karnataka.

The Single Judge had held that as per Regulation 3.1 of the UGC, there was no exclusion of non-Keralites in the notification.

The appellant appearing through Senior Advocate George Poonthottam and Advocate Nisha George placed reliance on several judgments of the Supreme Court to assert that a candidate who has been certified as belonging to SC/ST/OBC in a particular State cannot claim benefits or privileges on the basis of the said certification in another State.

Senior Advocate P Ravindran and Advocate P.K Ibrahim appeared for Ismail and contested the appeal. Senior Government Pleader AJ Varghese appeared for the State in the matter. 

The Division Bench concluded that Ismail was not entitled to stake his claim in a reserved seat on the basis of the certificate issued to him from the State of Karnataka. It further stated that the reservation policy of a State need not be tinkered with so as to be in line with the UGC Regulation.

Therefore it was held that the notification inviting the candidates on an All India basis in accordance with the UGC Regulations cannot mean that the reservation of posts which was in accordance with the Constitutional mandate as implemented within the State is affected in any manner.

As such, Ismail's selection was set aside and the University was directed to appoint the petitioner, being the second rank holder in the selection to the said post within one month. The appeal was accordingly allowed. 

Case Title: Dr. Abdul Haleem PP v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 174

Click Here To Read/Download The Order