Live
- Physically-challenged girl receives wheelchair
- Two hostel girls attempt suicide
- Sec’bad Cantt set to get SNDP push to tide over sewage woes
- Minister rules out fixing smart meters to farm pump sets
- BJP will kick out infiltrators once in power in Jharkhand: Yogi
- Priest injured in explosion near temple
- Party polling booth, mandal elections to be completed by Nov-end: Kishan
- HYDRA, TGPCB to jointly protect water quality in lakes
- Are strict laws needed to ensure MLAs attend Assembly sessions?
- Police arrest notorious inter-state OLX fraudster who duped 200 people
Supreme Court upholds striking down of 5 per cent additional marks in Haryana CET
Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the Punjab & Haryana High Court's decision to strike down the award of 5 per cent additional marks in the Common Eligibility Test (CET) under the garb of socio-economic criteria.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the Punjab & Haryana High Court's decision to strike down the award of 5 per cent additional marks in the Common Eligibility Test (CET) under the garb of socio-economic criteria.
A vacation bench, headed by Justice Abhay S. Oka, refused to entertain a batch of special leave petitions filed by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission and state government assailing the validity of the high court's May 31 judgement.
Dismissing the pleas, the Bench, also comprising Justice Rajesh Bindal, said that it found absolutely no error in the impugned judgment of the high court.
In its decision, the Punjab & Haryana High Court said that once reservations have already been provided statutorily under the EWS category, as well as on account of social backwardness by providing reservation for Backward Class, further granting benefits under socio-economic criteria would lead to breach of 50 per cent ceiling limit imposed by the Supreme Court and recognised by the Constitution framers.
It added that the socio-economic criteria introduced by the Human Resources Department of the Haryana government was clearly an act of arbitrariness and discrimination created by similarly situated persons and no person ought to be given benefits. The writ petitions filed before the Punjab & Haryana High Court contended that the grant of 5 per cent bonus marks provided on different accounts was wholly violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution and created an artificial classification amongst equals on the basis of residence, family, income, place of birth and the status in the society.
It added that before laying down the socio-economic criteria, neither quantifiable data was collected nor any extensive study was conducted.
