DEV GUPTA versus PEC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND ORS.

DEV GUPTA versus PEC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND ORS.

The imposition of a uniform minimum 75% aggregate marks as an eligibility condition for admission under the 2% sports quota subverted the object of the sports quota (which is to promote sports performance) and was discriminatory under Article 14; therefore exclusion of candidates who secured less than 75% was...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Dev Gupta; Respondent: PEC University of Technology and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment; Final Judgment by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside
Legal Topics
Sports Quota, Eligibility Criteria for Admissions, Article 14 Equality, Discrimination, Admissions Policy
Education Constitutional Law Sports Sports Quota Eligibility Criteria for Admissions Article 14 Equality Discrimination Admissions Policy

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dev Gupta

Appellant

PEC University of Technology and Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment; Final Judgment by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether imposition of a minimum 75% aggregate marks in the qualifying examination as an eligibility condition for claiming admission under the 2% sports quota is arbitrary or discriminatory and violates Article 14
  2. 2 Whether candidates excluded for securing less than 75% marks must be held eligible for remaining sports quota seats and what relief should follow

Ratio Decidendi

The imposition of a uniform minimum 75% aggregate marks as an eligibility condition for admission under the 2% sports quota subverted the object of the sports quota (which is to promote sports performance) and was discriminatory under Article 14; therefore exclusion of candidates who secured less than 75% was unwarranted and the clauses enforcing that criterion are unenforceable; however admissions already granted need not be disturbed and remaining vacant sports quota seat(s) must be filled applying the sports-policy standards and the immediately preceding academic year's eligibility criterion within two weeks.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside

Orders

  • The clauses enforcing the 75% minimum eligibility for sports quota candidates declared unenforceable and void
  • Remaining vacant seat(s) in the sports quota shall be filled by applying the standards in the UT Chandigarh sports policy as applied by the respondent university to determine inter se sports merit of candidates whose candidature was rejected for securing less than 75%; such candidates must have qualified in terms of...