In a significant ruling, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has struck down a contentious clause from a government. The clause in question, Clause D(2), had eliminated the income criterion for eligibility for availing foreign scholarships, leading to distortions in the distribution of scholarships.
The division bench comprising Justices Avinash Gharote and MS Jawalkar delivered the verdict earlier this week on Wednesday (May 8), highlighting the necessity to rectify imbalances and ensure fairness in educational opportunities. The bench noted that the Clause D(2) exempted students admitted to the top 100 QS World University Ranking institutions from the income criteria, which led to financially-stable students availing benefits intended for economically-deprived candidates, thus distorting the scheme’s purpose.
The ruling was prompted by a writ petition filed by a 28-year-old student from Nagpur, Mayur Sanghrakshit Patil who challenged the clause’s unfairness, particularly its adverse impact on economically disadvantaged students like himself.
Patil, belonging to the Scheduled Caste (SC) category, argued against the clause’s implications, citing his own financial constraints in pursuing higher education abroad. Despite being selected for a program at Duke University in the USA, Patil faced difficulties obtaining a loan due to financial constraints, depriving him of his right to education.
“The benefit of the scheme is availed by students who are economically stable and can themselves make expenses to seek education abroad. His annual family income, standing at Rs 2,78,000 placed him within the lower-income bracket,” news agency PTI quoted Patil as saying.
The petitioner also submitted the information regarding students and the income of their guardians.
The court noted that the information provided portrays a very dismal picture as students whose guardians have substantial income and who are well-placed in life have been granted the benefit of the scholarship, which defeats the very purpose for which the scheme was brought into force – to grant scholarships to persons who could not afford higher education abroad.
The court’s scrutiny revealed the discrepancy caused by clause D(2), which exempted students admitted to the top 100 QS World Ranking institutions from the income criteria. This exemption led to financially-stable students availing benefits intended for economically-deprived candidates, thus distorting the scheme’s purpose, it noted.
Additionally, the court noted the government’s inconsistent stance on income criteria, with revisions being made due to factors such as COVID-19. Despite discussions proposing a revision to a maximum family income of Rs 8 lakh, no formal amendment was enacted, leaving the 2017 resolution intact.
The verdict stressed the necessity of preserving the scholarship’s original intent, aimed at supporting backward caste students in accessing higher education. By nullifying Clause D (2), the court aims to rectify the imbalance in scholarship distribution and uphold fairness in access to educational opportunities.
The court directed the authorities to reassess Patil’s scholarship application within two weeks, considering the implications of the ruling.
(With inputs from PTI)