Chandigarh: Panjab University not a central institute, not bound to offer OBC quota, says V-C
As per the admission handbook of 2025, PU offers 5% reservation to backward classes, but not the 27% reservation for OBC students, mandated as per central rules.
Citing a judgment by the Punjab and Haryana high court, PU vice-chancellor Renu Vig clarified that PU was not a central institute and, thus, didn't need to follow these reservation norms.
In August 2024, the bench of high court chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Vikas Suri had observed that PU did not come within the ambit of the term 'Central Educational Institution' as defined under Section 2(d) of the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006, and reservation in terms of Section 3 of the Act (supra) cannot be forced upon it.
In the 2000s also, the university had implemented OBC reservation as per central rules and asked University Grants Commission (UGC) for funds for the extra seats. However, UGC did not allow this.
In a letter in 2011, UGC had claimed that the central policy applied only to centrally funded institutions and PU in its special status, as an inter-state body corporate, didn't qualify for this.
Proposal for quota in faculty recruitment pending with Centre
PU had also prepared a proposal for 27% OBC reservation in faculty recruitment in May 2024, but it remains pending with the Union ministry of education, as claimed by PU officials.
While the Punjab government's policy specifies 12% OBC reservation, the central policy mandates a 27% quota, leaving PU torn between which policy to implement.
A proposal was prepared in May 2024 by a committee, recommending 27% seats to be set aside for OBC candidates, out of which 12% will be solely for OBC candidates from Punjab.
There has been no update since then, even as student parties, including Sath and Students For Society , have held protests regarding this. Some faculty members have also protested against PU on this issue.
Education dept to seek legal opinion after Supreme Court direction
Meanwhile, officials of the UT higher education department said they will need to seek legal opinion to get more clarity on already completed college admissions.
'We grant a week's time to comply with and make amendments to the necessary rules. The prospectus to admission within Chandigarh will be amended accordingly…' the Supreme Court court had observed in its order.
Officials said the OBC reservation policy will have to be notified by the social welfare department for implementation. While new admissions will be done as per the new rules on OBC reservation, the department will seek legal opinion on how to accommodate students who have already claimed seats for the 2025-26 session, especially for the UG courses.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
a few seconds ago
- Hans India
Gauhati HC directs those facing eviction from Golaghat forests to submit land rights proof
Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has directed those facing eviction from Doyang and South Nambar forests in Assam's Golaghat district to submit within 10 days proof of land rights or vacate the land. Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar, hearing the petition of 74 people claiming they have been in possession of the land since the time of their forefathers, also directed the state advocate general to submit an affidavit by a forest officer stating that the appellants have been residing in the reserved forest area without any entitlement and are liable to be evicted forthwith. The petitioners challenged the issuance of notices by the district authority asking them to vacate their land within seven days, alleging that such action of the respondents is in contravention of certain provisions of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 and the Assam Land Policy, 2019 as also the guidelines of the Supreme Court's order of December 13, 2024. A group of 59 people and another group of about 15 people had filed two separate petitions and both the appeals were taken up together for hearing since the issues involved in these appeals are identical and related to the eviction of encroachers from reserved forest areas. The claim of the petitioners was that they have been in possession of the land in question since the time of their forefathers and such notices have been served upon them without any specific demarcation as to whether the land in question, said to be in illegal occupation of the appellants/writ petitioners, is a revenue or forest land. The contention of the appellants in these appeals is that no procedure has been followed for their eviction from their houses, which had been allocated to them under some scheme of the government in the past. The court observed that no documentary evidence had been submitted to support these claims. The state advocate general, however, contested the petitioners' submission and stated that the appellants are encroachers in the reserve forests, namely, Doyang and South Nambar reserve forests. He submitted that after the notification converting the forests to reserved forests and its proclamation by the officer concerned, any non-forest activity in reserved forests would be a criminal offence for which a penalty has been provided under the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891. He further submitted that approximately 29 lakh bighas (around 9.5 lakh acres) of land in the reserved forests in the entire state have been occupied by encroachers and with the drive undertaken by the government for removing such encroachers, more than one lakh bighas (around 33,000 acres) of land has been cleared of encroachment. The advocate general contended that none of the appellants are flood-affected or landless, or forest dwellers, but are squatters and encroachers who, by their continuous illegal activities, have been damaging the natural habitat of wildlife. The Doyang and Nambar reserve forests had been notified about 100 years ago and never in the past, the appellants had made any claim for settlement, or for their right for 'jhum' or shifting cultivation, or else it would have been decided by the forest authorities, he said. He also submitted that the forest area in question has been demarcated and only such persons, who are found to be residing in such demarcated areas, have been issued notices. The chief justice observed that, barring a statement by the petitioners that they have been residing in the houses constructed over the years, which do not fall in the reserved forest area, no documentary proof for such a statement has been given. "However, in order to satisfy ourselves that the appellants are not forcefully and illegally evicted from their place of residence, we permit them to bring on record any document to establish the claim of their having been allocated land in the reserved forest area for the construction of houses," the chief justice observed. The court extended the time given to them to clear the forest area or submit documentary evidence of their land rights by another 10 days, to be counted from August 5, the day the order was passed, and till then no coercive steps shall be taken against the appellants. The court fixed the next date of hearing on August 14. The state government has carried out seven eviction drives since June this year, affecting more than 50,000 people and Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma had earlier said that all unauthorised occupation of forest land, VGR (Village Grazing Reserve), PGR (Professional Grazing Reserve), Satras, Namghars, and other public areas would be cleared in a phased manner. Most of the people displaced due to the eviction drive are Bengali-speaking Muslim communities who claim that their ancestors had moved and settled in the areas where drives were carried out after their land in the 'Char' or riverine areas got washed away due to erosion by the Brahmaputra.
Hindustan Times
a few seconds ago
- Hindustan Times
Experts suggest increasing priority area for Great Indian Bustards in Rajasthan: Centre to SC
New Delhi, The Centre on Thursday informed the Supreme Court about a suggestion to add an extra 850 square kilometer area in priority Great Indian Bustards habitats in Rajasthan. Experts suggest increasing priority area for Great Indian Bustards in Rajasthan: Centre to SC These critically endangered birds are particularly found in Rajasthan and Gujarat, and the alarming decrease in their numbers can be attributed to frequent collisions with overhead power transmission lines, including those of solar plants, near their habitats. They have lateral vision as their eyes are on the sides of their head and they find it difficult to change their course of flight when confronted with a live wire. Observing the birds were an endangered species, requiring urgent protection, the apex court in March last year formed an expert committee to suggest areas for underground laying of power transmission lines in priority and potential GIB habitats in Rajasthan and Gujarat. The matter came up for hearing on Thursday before a bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar. Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre, said initially, around 99,000 square kilometer area was held up in Rajasthan and Gujarat where renewable energy projects could not take place for conservation of GIBs. Referring to the March 2024 verdict, Bhati said the top court set up the committee, which has submitted two reports, one each for Rajasthan and Gujarat. She said the judgement referred to priority and potential areas. Bhati said the committee opined an original priority area of around 13,000 sq km in Rajasthan should remain sacrosanct and remain a priority area. "Additionally, the committee has recommended 850 sq km to be added as an additional priority area which should remain sacrosanct," she said, pointing out a dissent note in the report over some aspects. Bhati said the court would have to consider both the reports. The 2024 verdict noted the total priority area was 13,663 sq km in both states whereas the total potential area was 80,680 sq km. The verdict further observed in Rajasthan, 13,163 sq km was priority area, 78,580 sq km was potential area and 5,977 sq km was additionally important areas. Similarly, for Gujarat, the verdict noted 500 sq km was priority area, 2,100 sq km was potential area and 677 sq km was additionally important areas. During Thursday's hearing, the bench asked whether there was any opposition to the committee's recommendations. "One aspect which we are indicating is that there is a very high priority area because the breeding is taking place just adjacent to that and we believe that should be included," senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the petitioner, said. Referring to another aspect, Divan said they just wanted it to be refined. "They have suggested a very good thing, that is, a power corridor so that all the lines are at one place instead of criss-crossing and creating a hazard," he said. The bench posted the matter for September 16. In its March 2024 verdict, the apex court said the order passed by it in April 2019 would need to be suitably modulated and a blanket direction for the undergrounding of low-voltage and high-voltage power lines would need calibration and to be looked at by domain experts. The apex court was hearing a PIL filed by retired IAS officer M K Ranjitsinh and others which said the birds were on the verge of extinction and the top court's 2021 order hadn't been complied with. The top court, in its 2021 judgment on the PIL, passed a slew of directions to protect the birds. Gujarat and Rajasthan governments were ordered to replace overhead electric cables with underground cables, wherever feasible, and install bird diverters in priority areas where the birds live. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
New Indian Express
26 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
If Congress is serious, let it declare OBC leader as PM candidate: BJP
HYDERABAD: BJP state president N Ramchander Rao on Wednesday said that the Congress dharna in Delhi was nothing but a 'political drama'. In a press statement issued here, the BJP leader said: 'Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy says that Rahul Gandhi wants the implementation of enhanced BC reservations. If it is true, then ask Rahul Gandhi to declare an OBC leader as the Congress prime ministerial candidate.' 'Let Rahul Gandhi announce that an OBC would be made PM if Congress is voted to power. If he doesn't, then it would be construed that Congress is hoodwinking BCs in the name of reservations,' he said. Ramchander, however, added that the Congress would never return to power in the country. He said that the proposal to allocate 10 per cent reservations to Muslims within the 42 per cent reservations proposed for BCs was an injustice to the Backward Classes. 'The proposed 42 per cent reservations should be given entirely to BCs,' he said. 'Today's protest by the Congress in Delhi was just a 'failed drama', which was directed by Rahul Gandhi and enacted by Revanth Reddy,' he added.
