Randomness In Fixation Of Cut Off Age For Reservation Not Sufficient To Characterize It As Arbitrary: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that randomness in fixation of a cut off age for availing the benefit of reservation for a particular category is not sufficient to characterize it as an arbitrary or unreasonable decision.

"The fixation of a cut off age does sometimes occasion hardship upon a particular category of applicants or candidates. Although there is some randomness in the fixation of a cut off age, by its very nature, that is not sufficient to characterize it as an arbitrary or unreasonable decision," Justice Prateek Jalan observed.

The Court was dealing with a petition filed by son of an ex-serviceman, aspiring to gain admission in a medical course and sought issuance of a CW certificate issued by the Centre and Kendriya Sainik Board.

The CW certificate is issued to children and wards of Armed Forces personnel, for whom seats are reserved or priority admissions are available in various educational institutions.

The case of the petitioner was that the KSB had declined to issue a CW certificate to him for the reason of him being more than 25 years old. According to the petitioner, the impugned communication recorded that he could not be termed as a "dependent" of his father beyond the age of 25 years.

It was thus submitted by the petitioner that the Union and the KSB's decision was arbitrary and unreasonable as he also belonged to the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category, for which the National Medical Commission had prescribed the maximum age of 30 years for application to medical courses.

On the other hand, Union and the submitted that the Centre had fixed the upper age limit of 25 years for issuance of educational concession certificates for children and wards of Armed Forces personnel as a policy decision, which does not warrant interference of the writ court.

It was added that as far as OBC category candidates are concerned, this does not imply a mandate upon the Government to extend the same age limit in respect of CW category reservations.

Accordingly, the Court said that the decision taken by the respondents was a policy decision, which did not display any such arbitrariness or unreasonableness as to merit the intervention of the writ court.

"Reservation in respect of OBC category students and CW category students are separate categories of reservations. The age limit fixed by the NMC for OBC candidates is 30 years and that remains available to the petitioner No. 1. As recorded above, the NMC itself does not suggest that the same age limit must be applied to CW category candidates also," the Court added.

Reliance was placed on Rachna & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr., where the Supreme Court held as thus:

"It is not in the domain of the courts to embark upon an inquiry as to whether a particular public policy is wise and acceptable or whether better policy could be evolved. The Court can only interfere if the policy framed is absolutely capricious and non-informed by reasons, or totally arbitrary, offending the basic requirement of Article 14 of the Constitution."

The Court also relied on the decision delivered by the Apex Court in Hirandra Kumar vs. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and Another (2019) to observe that randomness in the fixation of a cut off age, by its very nature, is not sufficient to characterize it as an arbitrary or unreasonable decision.

Accordingly, the plea was dismissed.

Case Title: KETAN KUMAR & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

Click Here To Read Order