Bombay HC Cancels Government Law College ( GLC) Admissions 2011 | HC asked GLC Cancle Admissions to all Seats in the First Year Course

Terming the entire admission process "illegal", the high court on Thursday directed Government Law College ( GLC) to rework admissions to all seats in the first year course.

The order followed after judges were informed that admissions of 207 students were processed according to faculty-wise reservations and this was contrary to Mumbai University's ordinance and even did not reflect in the college's prospectus.

Some 33 seats need to be filled. A division bench of Justice D K Deshmukh and Justice R G Ketkar, who were initially unwilling to disturb the admissions, were aghast. "There is no justification for such reservations. You will have to rework all admissions. Put out an advertisement stating that you are converting all final admissions into provisional admissions," said Justice Deshmukh. He added, "Your entire law college is rampant with illegalities and runs on somebody's whims and fancies."

The genesis for the litigation was after a CBSE student, Swati Khinvasara, challenged deduction of 5% marks of applicants who have passed their XII standard exams from any other board except Maharashtra. The court on Wednesday stayed admissions by a day. "Are you dividing seats according to streams?" asked the judge. Additional government pleader M D Naik replied that the faculty-wise reservations were being done under the recommendation of the local advisory committee set up by a 2004 government resolution (GR).

The judges asked if it was mentioned in the prospectus. "Some law college students may have drafted the prospectus. What is the point of printing a prospectus and wasting government money?" said Justice Deshmukh. The judges termed the prospectus "amateurish".

Khinvasara's advocate, Mukesh Vashi, informed the court the decision was taken on recommendations of the committee (which includes retired HC judge Justice D R Dhanuka and senior counsel Rafiq Dada) but bears no signatures. "The letter gives an impression that they are party to it. You (state) are misrepresenting them. They should sue you (state) for defamation," said Justice Deshmukh.


Source: Times of India