Minority institutions in Mumbai up in arms as seats in open category shrink following SC/ST/OBC quota
A major controversy has erupted in the First Year Junior College (FYJC) admission process in minority trust-run junior colleges in Maharashtra this year after the state government has applied SC/ST/OBC reservations on the open/general seats. Alleging that this change is arbitrary and without any intimation, minority colleges in the city are now exploring options to legally challenge it.
As per the established practice, 45 per cent of the total intake in minority institutions is kept open to all students, irrespective of category, after reserving 50 per cent for the particular minority, and 5 per cent for management quota. However, starting this year, the FYJC admission portal is reflecting that SC/ST/OBC reservation is applied on those 45 percent seats, thereby significantly reducing the seats available for open category.
This has sparked widespread confusion among junior colleges run by minority institutions, as they say the Supreme Court has explicitly prohibited such reservation in minority institutions, as it would increase the number of quota seats to beyond 80 per cent. Authorities at the minority colleges are also irked that there was no clear communication on the change, as most of them only noticed it on the admission portal. 'With no clarity from the government, there is no option but to seek justice at the court of law. Future course of action will be decided after understanding implications of this new rule and its legal complications,' said principal of a minority-trust run junior college in Mumbai.
Colleges are terming it to be a completely random move as there is absolute lack of clear guidelines on the same by the government. Principal of one of the premier colleges in Mumbai said, 'Multiple communications have been sent by the government regarding FYJC admissions along with its rules and regulation but in none of them there was a mention of introduction of SC/ST/OBC reservation in minority-run colleges. Whereas the admission portal is reflecting these changes.'
A government official said the only communication in this regard is a Government Resolution (GR) issued on May 6 on the FYJC admission process. The sentence from the GR that the officer referred to deals with vacant seats under the minority quota after three rounds of admissions.
'If admissions are lower than the intake capacity in minority quota, admissions can be given as per interchanging between linguistic and religious minority groups. Even after that, if seats remain vacant, those surrendered vacant seats will be filled based on the centralised admission process where all social and parallel reservations are applicable,' the GR states.
The officer also referred to a decision by minority department of Government of Maharashtra from May 2013 which states that after reserving 50 percent seats for candidates coming from their minority, on remaining 50 percent seats that are filled by non-minority, it is mandatory to admit candidates from SC/ST/OBC and other deprived castes on the seats reserved for the weaker elements as per policy of education department of state government. 'The government is only implementing this now which has been pending for so long,' said the officer.
Colleges, however, highlighted that the May 6 GR effectively means that constitutional reservation will apply to seats left vacant in the minority quota. 'But nowhere does the document mention that the state has decided to implement the constitutional reservation to all seats in minority colleges which are going for the Centralised Admission Process (CAP). These seats until last year have been open for all to be filled only on the basis of merit. We cannot know of the changes until informed about it,' said principal of another minority-trust run college adding that there was no discussion or meeting in this regard for colleges to know about it without a written communication in this regard.
However, the government officer insisted that though the particular sentence in the GR pertains to leftover seats under the minority quota, 'it is implied here that the other remaining seats will see application of reservation'.
'That is the point of conducting centralised admission process so that the system is the same in all colleges. There should not be any confusion over this,' the officer added.
With no clarity from the government, legal experts say that the minority trust-run colleges have an option to approach the High Court to challenge the Government Resolution/s on the grounds of arbitrariness or non-consultation by the concerned department among other contentions and await court's decision or interpretation on the same.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Speak freely
Why all courts must protect your right to speak your mind In India, the Constitution says you have the right to speak freely – as long as you don't break certain fair rules (like spreading hate or lies). But this right only really works if all courts across the country protect it. Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) – the top court in India – stood up strongly for free speech. In the case of a film called Thug Life by Kamal Haasan, someone said their feelings were hurt and wanted the film blocked in Karnataka. But the SC said no – just because someone is offended doesn't mean another person should lose their right to express themselves. If hurt feelings were enough, then free speech would always be in danger. This isn't the first time. Just a few months ago, in a case about poet Imran Pratapgarhi, the SC said that even if lots of people dislike your opinion, you still have the right to share it. But not all courts agree. Recently, the Calcutta High Court told a young person, 'You can't hurt others just because you have free speech.' And the Karnataka High Court told Haasan something similar. Lower courts also sometimes say things that go against what the SC has already made very clear. This creates confusion and makes people afraid to speak their minds, because they don't know if a local court might punish them, even if the SC would support them. In a strong democracy, free speech matters. And if it's a right promised by the Constitution, every court – not just the top one – needs to protect it. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Kerala to include lesson on Governor's powers in school syllabus
Amid growing friction between the Kerala government and Raj Bhavan, state general education minister V Sivankutty said a lesson on the constitutional powers and duties of Governors would soon be a part of the school curriculum. In Kerala, the office of Governor Rajendra Arlekar, who took charge in January and who was seen to initially enjoy cordial relations with chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan(PTI) The announcement came just a day after Sivankutty walked out of an event at the Raj Bhavan in Thiruvananthapuram protesting against the display of a portrait of 'Bharat Mata', associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), on the dais. Speaking to reporters on Friday, Sivankutty said that the lesson explaining the constitutional rights and duties of Governors in India would be included in the second volume of social science textbooks for class 10 students this year. The chapter will be added to textbooks for students of classes 11 and 12 as part of curriculum revision as well, he added. 'Schools are the ideal place to learn the values of democracy. School curriculum is being revised while upholding constitutional values. In the country today, efforts to destabilise elected state governments through governors are rising. The Supreme Court has recently made it clear what the constitutional rights of governors are,' the minister said. His reference was to the Supreme Court's ruling on April 8 that set a timeline for Governors to clear state bills or refer them to the President. It also set a timeline for the President to clear them. The President has sought a Presidential Reference on the judgement. The court's ruling came after the state of Tamil Nadu approached it citing the alleged obstructionist behaviour of Governor R N Ravi. Several states governed by parties opposed to the Bharatiya Janata Party have seen clashes between the elected government and the Governor, whose powers are limited under the Constitution. When asked if the decision had anything to do with the ongoing row with the Raj Bhavan over the use of the 'Bharat Mata' portrait, the minister replied, 'I strongly feel students must learn and understand the duties of governors. That's why we have decided to include the chapter. It is a part of constitution. It is true that governors are interfering a lot. Students must be taught the right things.' In Kerala, the office of Governor Rajendra Arlekar, who took charge in January and who was seen to initially enjoy cordial relations with chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan -- especially when compared to the former Governor Arif Mohammed Khan -- has been locked in a tussle with the LDF government over the usage of a portrait of 'Bharat Mata' , showing a woman holding a saffron flag astride a lion at official events. The CM and ministers of the state government have argued that the portrait is associated with the RSS, the ideological fount of the BJP, and its display at official government events is inappropriate and violative of secular values. On Thursday, Sivankutty walked out in the middle of an event at the Raj Bhavan to honour scouts and guides after objecting to the display of the portrait. Later, he argued that Indian nationalism draws its strength from its diversity of languages, religions, regions, cultures etc. None of these can be contained within a narrow or unified image, he said. 'Calling the image of a woman carrying a saffron flag the sole symbol of Indian patriotism ignores this basic reality,' he added. Raj Bhavan issued a statement claiming that the minister's 'staged walkout' was a 'gross violation of protocol and a grave insult to the office of the Governor'. The Governor also said that there was 'no question of doing away with Bharat Mata as we draw our idea of patriotism and nationhood' from it. The office of the Governor said the minister's actions set a wrong precedent and that it viewed the developments with utmost concern. The row also spilled out onto the streets of Thiruvananthapuram with the SFI, student wing of CPI(M), taking a protest march to Raj Bhavan. In response, ABVP, the student wing of the RSS, displayed black flags as a convoy of the general education minister passed by.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
HC sets aside condition to obtain vehicle passes from district police
Madurai: Madras high court on Friday set aside the condition imposed by Madurai city police to obtain vehicle passes for participation in the Lord Murugan devotees conference, saying the right to movement throughout the territory of India is guaranteed to all citizens under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution. The court modified the order of a single bench in this regard. The court was hearing an appeal filed by Hindu Munnani functionary M Arasupandi challenging a condition imposed by a single bench. The petitioner had earlier filed another petition challenging certain conditions imposed by the city police while permitting the conference. The single bench had refused to interfere with the condition requiring participants to obtain passes for vehicles from the concerned district police. Aggrieved by the condition, the petitioner moved Supreme Court. The petition was disposed of as withdrawn on the petitioner's request, following which he preferred the present appeal before high court. Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the object of the state appears to be to put spokes in the wheels and discourage participants to the conference. A division bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar observed that since the authorities themselves chose to grant permission for the conference, no exception can be taken to its conduct. The condition imposed by the assistant commissioner of police, Anna Nagar, Madurai city, states that no vehicle carrying the conference participants without a vehicle pass will be allowed to enter city limits. An assistant commissioner can have jurisdiction and sway only over her territorial limits. The official cannot issue an order preventing the entry of vehicles into Madurai city. It is open to any citizen to enter Madurai city in his/her vehicle, and such a right cannot be interfered with by an assistant commissioner, said the judges. In the case on hand, not more than 10,000 vehicles are expected, and therefore, there is no need to impose such an onerous condition. The appellant undertook that participants who come in their personal vehicles or hired vehicles would deposit the photostat copies of the RC book, insurance certificate, and driving licence at the police booths at various parking places earmarked. "The organisers assure us that pucca arrangements have been made so that there is no stampede, which was witnessed in Bengaluru, Delhi, and other places recently," the judges observed.
