'Authority Asking For OBC-NCL Certificate Must Keep Cut-Off Date Of Issuance In Line With Financial Year; Availing Reservation Should Be Non-Cumbersome': Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has observed that an authority asking for the OBC-NCL certificate must reasonably keep the cut-off date of issuance in line with a particular financial year, as a deviation leads to confusion and may also deprive deserving candidates of the benefit of reservations.

In that context, the Bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that, "an authority asking for the OBC-NCL certificate should reasonably keep the cut-off date of issuance in line with a particular financial year. A deviation from the said position not only creates confusion and uncertainty but, at times, also deprives deserving candidates of the benefit of reservations."

The Court also stressed that, "the mechanism for availing the benefit of reservation, which undeniably caters to the socially and educationally backward classes, should not only be easy and logical, but also non-cumbersome. If the process itself becomes an obstacle, it operates as an affront on the constitutional goal of ensuring equality of opportunity... The concept of reservations is not secluded from the layers of inequality and is, in fact, placed at the heart of the equality discourse. For the longest time, this concept was understood as antithetical to the concept of equality of opportunity. It took us long, as a society, to accept the fact that the reservation policy is itself a dimension of the concept of equality of opportunity and is not antithetical to it. The issues with respect to implementation of the policy have emerged time and again. However, such issues, like the present one, are to be resolved keeping in view the ultimate goal of securing substantial equality."

Counsel Amitesh Kumar, along with others, appeared for the petitioner, while Counsel Anand Varma, along with others, appeared for the respondent.

In this case, in the January 2024 session of the Institution of National Importance Combined Entrance Test (INI-CET) conducted by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), the petitioner filed a plea against the cancellation of his admission. The reason behind the cancellation was the invalidation of Kumar's OBC-NCL category certificate. AIIMS communicated to the petitioner that his candidature would be moved to the unreserved category since his cut-off rank fell under the unreserved merit list.

The institute informed the petitioner that his OBC-NCL certificates were considered invalid because they were not issued within the stipulated timeline mentioned in the prospectus. Consequently, he was excluded from consideration under the OBC-NCL category for admission. In response, the petitioner contested this decision through a plea, seeking redress for the cancellation of his admission in the INI-CET January 2024 session.

The Court reached the following conclusions:

a) The insistence of the respondent upon the OBC-NCL certificate to have been issued between 06.11.2022 to 05.11.2023 is arbitrary and does not have any rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved through the reservation of seats.

b) The requirement of an OBC-NCL certificate is fundamentally different from a technical/academic qualification. While the former is mere evidence of what already exists, the latter refers to the acquisition of a qualification.

c) The insistence by the respondent on the submission of the OBC-NCL certificate issued during the given cut-off date, is arbitrary and has no rational nexus with the object of reservation. Also, the candidature may not be cancelled solely on account of submission of the OBC-NCL certificate issued beyond the cutoff date, but within the extended time provided by the respondent.

d) The cut-off date is to be construed in a manner favourable to the candidate, and not to nullify a fundamental right merely because the OBC-NCL certificate is being submitted post the cut-off date.

In light of the same, it was held that, "the petitioner’s OBC-NCL certificate dated 23.11.2023 ought to have been accepted by the respondent and it is directed accordingly."

Subsequently, the Court confirmed the admission of the petitioner.

Appearances:

Petitioner: Counsels Amitesh Kumar, Priti Kumari & Mrinal Kishor

Respondent: Counsels Anand Varma, Apoorva Pandey & Ayush Gupta

Cause Title: Ravi Kumar vs All India Institute of Medical Sciences

Click here to read/download the Judgment