All these problems in the time of administration of the statute are arising as we still using General Clauses Act 1897 to interpret our statutes. We are still lacking in our home grown rules of interpretation universally applicable across India and a legal dictionary developed on the basis of precedents and other scholarly work of Indian legal professionals. Hence even a statute drafted and enforced in 21st century is having vague provisions.

Critics argue that if an institution is forced to artificially inflate its permitted strength to accommodate reservations without a proportional increase in faculty and laboratories, the value of the degree for merit-based students decreases. This is also violative of right to quality education.

Section 4(d) acts as an exemption clause. It allows the Central Government to exclude specific “high-level” courses, particularly post-doctoral programs, from the 27% OBC, 15% SC, and 7.5% ST reservation mandates.

Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Section 3 Bare Act Provision 3. Reservation of seats in Central Educational

The Court held that for “specialized” and “super-specialty” courses, reservations should be applied cautiously. The Court emphasized that in certain highly technical fields of medicine or engineering, merit must remain the sole criterion to maintain global standards, effectively creating a “specialty exception” even if the course technically leads to a master’s or doctoral degree.

In the landmark Five-Judge Bench decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Article 15(5) of the Constitution, which allows for reservations in private and public educational institutions, does not apply to Minority Educational Institutions. The Court held that forcing reservations upon them would destroy their “minority character” protected under Article 30(1). This judgment solidified the exemption mentioned in Section 4 of this Act.