Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard two appeals by special leave from a common judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court which had allowed writ appeals filed by unsuccessful candidates challenging the validity of an entrance test prescribed by the State Government for admission to four Government medical colleges in the Andhra area. The State Government had, for the first time in July 1970, prescribed an entrance test in addition to the qualifying examination for selection of candidates for the first year Integrated M.B.B.S. course. The total number of seats available was 550, and a large number of candidates applied; 5,137 applied, 4,669 were accepted for the test, and 4,331 actually appeared. Many unsuccessful candidates filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, contending that under the Andhra University Act, 1926, only the Academic Council was competent to prescribe qualifications for admission, and the Government could not substitute its own test; that the test encroached upon the central subject under Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule; and that it interfered with personal liberty under Article 21. A Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petitions, but a Division Bench allowed the writ appeals, holding the entrance test invalid. The State appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court held that under Article 162 of the Constitution, the executive power of a State extends to matters with respect to which the State Legislature has power to make laws. Since there was no legislation covering the field, the State Government was competent to prescribe a test to screen the best candidates. The Andhra University Act, 1926, only prescribed minimum qualifications for entry into a higher course of study, and a candidate did not have an unqualified right to a seat merely because he obtained higher marks than another candidate at the qualifying examination. Sections 23 and 33 of the Act did not make it incumbent upon the Government to make selection in accordance with the marks obtained at the qualifying examination. The entrance test was not in substitution of the University examination but something additional to it, and the mere fact that it was introduced for the first time was no ground for holding the method of selection invalid. The Court further held that the test did not militate against the power of Parliament under Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule, which relates to laying down how standards in institutions for higher education are to be determined and coordinated, and has no relation to a test prescribed by Government or by a university for selection of students from a large number of applicants. The test also did not affect personal liberty under Article 21, because every candidate subject to eligibility was at liberty to apply, and the deprivation of personal liberty, if any, in the matter of admission to a medical college was according to procedure established by law. The Court followed R. Chitralekha v. State of Mysore, Rajendran v. State of Madras, and Chitra Ghosh & Anr. v. Union of India. Accordingly, the appeals were allowed, the judgment of the High Court was set aside, and the writ petitions were dismissed, upholding the validity of the entrance test.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Executive Power of State - Article 162, Constitution of India, 1950 - State Government can prescribe entrance test for admission to its medical colleges absent legislation; executive power co-extensive with legislative power - Held test valid (Page 703 F-H). B) Education Law - Admission Criteria - Andhra University Act, 1926, Sections 23, 33 - The Act prescribes minimum qualifications, not mandatory selection based solely on qualifying exam marks; Government's test is additional, not substitution - Held not invalid (Pages 704 D-F, 708 F-G, 709 A-B, F). C) Constitutional Law - Legislative Competence - Entry 66, List I, Schedule VII, Constitution - Entry 66 relates to coordination of standards in higher education; does not preclude State's screening test for admission - Held no encroachment (Page 705 B-D). D) Constitutional Law - Personal Liberty - Article 21 - Entrance test does not violate personal liberty; admission to limited seats governed by procedure established by law - Held no violation (Pages 709 H; 710 A-B).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government's entrance test for admission to medical colleges was valid under the Constitution and the Andhra University Act, 1926, particularly with respect to Articles 21, 162 and Entry 66 of List I.
Final Decision
The appeals were allowed. The judgment of the High Court was set aside, and the writ petitions were dismissed. The entrance test prescribed by the Government was upheld as valid and not in violation of the Constitution or the Andhra University Act, 1926.
Law Points
- Executive power of State extends to matters within legislative competence under Article 162
- State can prescribe entrance test absent legislation
- Entry 66 List I does not bar State's screening test
- Article 21 not violated when procedure established by law
- Andhra University Act prescribes minimum qualifications
- not selection criteria
- entrance test additional to qualifying examination.
