NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain petitions challenging the legislation enacted by the Kerala Assembly fixing quotas in unaided (self-financing) minority and non-minority educational institutions from this academic year (2006-07).

A Bench of Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justice D.K. Jain before whom these petitions came up for admission told senior counsel Fali Nariman that being State legislations, it would be better for the petitioners to approach the Kerala High Court.

Mr. Nariman, however, submitted that a seven-judge Bench in the `P.A. Inamdar case' had categorically held that the minorities would have absolute rights in the matter of admission and since the Kerala legislation was in conflict with this judgment, the Supreme Court itself should hear the matter and stay the provision relating to the minorities.

But, Mr. Justice Balakrishnan pointed out that the judgment also stated that either the Centre or the States could enact legislations in this regard. Senior counsel K.K. Venugopal, appearing for Kerala, strongly opposed the stay and said the State was entitled to enact the law as per this judgment. When the Bench said it would dismiss the petitions, Mr. Nariman said they would withdraw the petitions and move the High Court concerned for relief. The Bench permitted them to withdraw the petitions and requested the High Court of Kerala to dispose of the petitions (once they are filed) as expeditiously as possible.

`Taking away rights'

The Kerala Private Medical College Managements Association, Malankara O.S.C. Medical Mission and Kerala S.F.E. College Managements Associations, which challenged the Kerala Professional Colleges (Prohibition of Capitation Fees, Regulation of Admissions, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fees and Other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence in Professional Education) Act, 2006, submitted that the law took away the rights of the minorities in the matter of admission. The petitioners also submitted that the State Government had been given powers to decide the fee structure and conduct only one Common Entrance Test (CET). They contended that the new law was a blatant attempt by the State to usurp legislative competence in respect of running unaided colleges and against the judgments of the Supreme Court in the Unnikrishnan, T.M.A. Pai and Inamdar cases. Further, imposition of the CET held by the State and enforcement of the reservation policy on available seats in unaided professional institutions would amount to serious encroachment into the autonomy of minority and non-minority education institutions.

They said the Act also empowered the State to constitute a fee committee to determine and approve the fee structure followed by the colleges. They sought quashing of the impugned law and an interim stay of its operation.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail