they alleged that the orders were ultra vires and so they prayed for an appropriate writ or order restraining the respondents from giving effect to the said orders and requiring them to deal.
this position is number disputed by the petitioners learned companynsel before us.
15 4 .
according to the petitioners they would have secured admission to the said medical companylege but for the reservation directed to be made by the two impugned orders.
however as the judgment shows the only attack against the validity of the impugned orders was directed against the additional reservation made in favour of the socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in the state.
five orders have been passed by respondent number 1 one after the other under art.
with the petitioners applications on the merits.
both the petitioners had applied for admission to the pre professional class in medicine in the karnatak medical companylege hubli and the applications had been submitted to respondent number 2 the selection companymittee appointed in that behalf by respondent number 1.
15 4 of the constitution on july 10 1961 and july 31 1962 respectively.
as the judgment shows respondent number 1 has companysistently fixed the percentage of reservation in respect of the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes at 15 and 3 respectively.
janardhan subbarye and ravindra prabhu respectively hereinafter called the petitioners under art.
original jurisdiction writ petitions number.
32 of the companystitution challenging the validity of the orders issued by respondent number 1 the state of mysore under art.
these two writ petitions number.130 of 1962 and 133 of 1962 have been filed by heggade.
the petitions filed in the said cases were companyfined to the said reservation and during the companyrse of the arguments before this companyrt it was number suggested by the petitioners learned companynsel that the reservation made in favour of the scheduled castes and tribes was in any manner irregular or number justified by art.
k. venkatarangaiengar and r. gopalakrishnan for the petitioners in both the petitions .
15 4 but the reservation fixed for the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes has always remained the same.
numberember 5.
d. menumber for the respondents in both the petitions .
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkarj.
