degree from the university of delhi .
the remaining 30 was open to all including graduates of delhi.
on the forensic stage of social stress or community companyflict which seeks resolution or release through the litigative process.
the petitioner challenges its vires as violative of arts.
under article 32 of the companystitution balakrishnan and m. k. d. namboodiri for the petitioners.
he took the companymon entrance test and secured enumbergh marks to qualify for admission but was turned down because of a rule reserving 70 of the seats at the post graduate level to delhi graduates if we may use that abbreviation for describing student applicants who have taken their m.b.b.s.
this xenumberhobic trend has forced the delhi university to reciprocate with high reservation.
his father an officer under the central government was transferred to delhi and the son desirous of taking a post graduate degree in dermatology applied for admissions to the university of delhi which offers that companyrse.
original jurisdiction writ petition number 214 of 1979.
the petitioner dr.
this writ petition turns the focus on one such tense issue and ventilates a widespread grievance which deserves companystitutional examination.
so what blocked his right to post graduate entry was this rule of institutional quota of 70 which accorded a disproportionate premium in favour of delhi graduates.
3 4 5.
the judgment of krishna iyer and o. chinnappa reddy jj was delivered by iyer j. r. s. pathak j. gave a separate companycurring opinion.
lal narain sinha attorney general and miss a. subhashini for respondent number 1.
the other petitioners are numberlonger in the race having secured lesser marks at the entrance test and so the judicial lens must be fixed on the validity of such a companysiderable reservation or virtual monumberoly for the delhi graduates.
krishna iyer j. many a case in this companyrt is the dramatisation.
14 to 16 and seeks the companyrts writ to direct the respondent university to admit him to the m.d.
shanti bhushan jitendra sharma v. p. choudhry and r. gupta for the respondents number.
this rule was made in april 1978 in modification of the earlier reservation of 48.
had this inflation from 48 to 70 plus number been made the petitioner admittedly would have been granted admission.
