Heggade Janardhan Subbarye vs The State Of Mysore And Another

Rewritten Version Notice: This is a rewritten version of the original judgment.

Court: supreme-court

Case Number: Writ Petitions Nos. 130 and 133 of 1962

Decision Date: 5 November 1962

Coram: P.B. Gajendragadkar, Bhuvneshwar P. Sinha, K.N. Wanchoo, K.C. Das Gupta, J.C. Shah

In the matter titled Heggade Janardhan Subbarye versus The State of Mysore and another, the Supreme Court of India rendered its judgment on 5 November 1962. The case was heard by a bench comprising P. B. Gajendragadkar, Bhuvneshwar P. Sinha, K. N. Wanchoo, K. C. Das Gupta, and J. C. Shah. The formal citation of the decision appears as 1963 AIR 702 and 1963 SCR Supplement (1) 475. The substantive issue concerned the constitutionality of a statutory provision relating to college admission, specifically the reservation of seats for socially and educationally backward classes, which the Court ultimately struck down, while upholding the reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under Article 15(4) of the Constitution of India. The petitioners challenged the validity of two orders issued by the State of Mysore on 10 July 1961 and 31 July 1962, alleging that those orders exceeded the authority granted by Article 13(4) of the Constitution. They reported that they had sought admission to the pre‑Professional Class in Medicine at Karnatak Medical College, Hubli, and asserted that, but for the reservations prescribed by the impugned orders, they would have secured admission. Consequently, they contended that the orders were ultra vires and sought an appropriate writ restraining the respondents from implementing the orders and directing that their applications be considered on merit. The Court found that the petitioners were entitled to the relief they claimed and consequently restrained the respondents from giving effect to the contested orders. In doing so, the Court followed the precedent set in M. R. Balaji v. State of Mysore, 1963 SCR Supplement 1 439, and quashed only the portion of the orders that provided for additional reservation for socially and educationally backward classes. The Court expressly left intact the reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, noting that this portion of the orders was not challenged and therefore continued to operate.

The original jurisdiction for this matter arose under Article 32 of the Constitution, which empowers the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights. The petitions were filed as Writ Petitions Nos. 130 and 133 of 1962. Counsel for the petitioners, who were Heggade Janardhan Subbarye and Ravindra Prabhu, appeared on behalf of both petitions, while counsel for the respondents represented the State of Mysore and the Selection Committee appointed to handle admissions. The judgment was delivered by Justice Gajendragadkar. The Court recounted that both petitioners had submitted applications to the Selection Committee, which had been constituted by the State of Mysore to consider admissions to the medical college. The petitioners argued that the reservations mandated by the two orders dated 10 July 1961 and 31 July 1962 prevented them from obtaining admission, and they claimed that the orders were beyond the legislative competence of the State. The Court noted that the points raised by the petitioners fell within the scope of the earlier decision in M. R. Balaji, establishing that the petitioners were indeed entitled to an appropriate writ. Although counsel for the respondents highlighted uncertainty regarding whether the reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was also affected by the Balaji ruling, the Court clarified that the earlier judgment had only struck down the additional reservation for socially and educationally backward classes. Accordingly, the Court affirmed that the reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes remained valid and enforceable, and it ordered the respondents to refrain from implementing the parts of the orders that had been declared unconstitutional.

The petitioners asserted that they would have been admitted to the Karnatak Medical College’s pre‑Professional class in Medicine if it were not for the reservations imposed by the two orders now under challenge, and they contended that those orders exceeded the authority of the State under the Constitution. Consequently, they prayed that the Court issue an appropriate writ or order restraining the respondents from implementing the orders and directing the respondents to consider the petitioners’ applications on their substantive merits. The issues raised in these petitions were found to be covered by the earlier decision of this Court in M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore, and it was thereby accepted as common ground that the petitioners were entitled to the writ or order they sought. Counsel for the State, however, drew the Court’s attention to the observation that, following the Balaji judgment, the State appeared uncertain whether the reservation provisions for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes contained in the impugned orders were also nullified by that decision. The record demonstrates that the State has consistently fixed the reservation percentages for the Scheduled Castes at fifteen per cent and for the Scheduled Tribes at three per cent, and that five separate orders were issued by the State under Article 15(4) with those percentages remaining unchanged throughout.

The Court noted that although the Balaji judgment does not expressly state that the validity of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes reservation was never challenged before this Court, the decision cannot be taken to affect that reservation because the only challenge to the impugned orders concerned the additional reservation made for the socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in the State. The petitions were limited to that specific reservation, and during the arguments before the Court, the petitioners’ counsel did not claim that the reservations for the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes were irregular or inconsistent with Article 15(4). This position was not disputed by the petitioners’ counsel. To remove any possible doubt, the Court clarified that its earlier judgment does not affect the validity of the reservation for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, which is distinct, separate, and independent of the reservation that was challenged. Accordingly, that reservation remains operative, and the quashing of the impugned orders does not alter its status. The orders were set aside solely because of the additional reservation for the socially and educationally backward classes, and therefore the State is justified in continuing to give effect to the reservations for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

In this case, the Court observed that the reservation concerned the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. After considering the submissions, the Court allowed the petitions that had been filed. The Court then directed that an appropriate writ or order be issued, which would restrain the respondents from putting into effect the two orders that had been challenged. By issuing such a writ, the Court intended to prevent any further implementation of the impugned orders until the matter could be fully resolved. The Court also made a monetary order, directing that the respondents should reimburse the petitioners for the costs they had incurred in pursuing the case, but the Court excluded from this reimbursement the fee that had been paid for the hearing. The direction on costs was intended to place the financial burden of the litigation on the respondents, while recognizing that the hearing fee was a separate matter. Finally, the Court recorded that the petitions were allowed, thereby confirming that the relief sought by the petitioners had been granted in accordance with the directions set out above.