JAMMU: In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Ashok Sharma a social activist challenged the rule 17 of Reservations Rules framed State of J and K under Reservation Act of the state, Division Bench of State High Court Comprising Justice Virender Singh and Justice Tashi Rabstan after hearing Adv Kuldip Singh Parihar for the petitioner observed that supplementary affidavit of the petitioner has already taken on record, however Advocate Anil Sethi appearing for the BOPEE has not responded till date and granted two weeks’ time for filing the respond to the PIL.
This significant order has been passed in a PIL filed by one Ashok Kumar challenging the Rule 17 of Reservation Rules of 2005 suffers from the voice of arbitrariness as it tends to give much more reservation to the candidate of reserved category that their entitlement.
According to the counsel for the PIL once a candidate belonging to reserved category is selected against open merit seat than he is to be considered for allotment of discipline/stream/college allocable to him on the basis of his merit and preference. The rules further provides that the resultant discipline/stream/college in the open merit category shall be allotted to reserved category candidate who is selected upon the reserved category candidate getting selected in the open merit category.
According to the rules a reserve category candidate selected in the open category can again shifted to reserved that category but he would end up consuming the open merit seat which may not be permissible as per the provision of Article 16 (1) 16(4) and 16 (4 A) of the constitution of India. JNF
