The Bombay High Court has stayed the reservation for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in the First Year Junior College (FYJC) admissions at the minority-run junior colleges of Maharashtra [ APD Jain Pathshala and Ors v Secretary of School Education and Secretary School Education and Sports Dept, Government of Maharashtra]
A Division Bench of Justice M S Karnik and Justice N R Borkar observed that an earlier Bombay High Court ruling, quashing a circular issued by Mumbai University for a similar reservation to backward classes in minority institutions, applied squarely to the present matter.
"Prima facie, we find that there is substance in the submissions advanced by the petitioners for the grant of interim relief. Accordingly, insofar as admission to Std XI is concerned, the mandate of social reservation shall not be made applicable to any seats in minority educational institutions," the Court directed.
The Court passed the order in a batch of petitions moved by minority institutions against the State decision to apply SC/ST/OBC reservation to the seats in minority colleges.
Maharashtra Association of Minority Educational Institutions (MAMEI), as well as several prominent colleges from Solapur and South Mumbai, including Jai Hind, KC, HR, and St. Xavier’s have moved the Court. They have called the government decision "arbitrary" and lacking legal authority.
At the center of the dispute is Clause 11 of a Government Resolution (GR) issued by the School Education Department on May 6. The clause permits vacant seats under the minority quota to be filled through the centralized admission process – subject to applicable social and parallel reservations – once intra-minority adjustments are exhausted.
Historically, minority institutions in Maharashtra have followed a 50-45-5 distribution formula – 50% for the respective minority community, 5% for management quota, and the remaining 45% for admissions without reservation.
However, for the 2025–26 academic year, the State online admission portal showed SC/ST/OBC reservations being applied to the open 45% seats in minority institutions.
Senior Advocate Milind Sathe, representing the petitioners, argued that the government decision violates Articles 15(5) and 30 of the Constitution of India, which expressly exclude minority institutions, both aided and unaided, from the purview of social reservation policies.
He contended that even unfilled minority seats should revert to open category admissions and not be subjected to reservation quotas.
In response, Government Pleader Neha Bhide submitted that the decision did not curtail the rights of minority institutions.
She argued that the policy only applied to surrendered minority seats and was introduced to ensure that unfilled seats were effectively utilized.
The move was implemented at the request of the institutions themselves, she claimed, adding that "social reservation is the obligation of the State".
However, the Court found merit in the arguments of the institutions and granted an interim stay on the operation of the contested clause of the May 6 GR. The State has been directed to file its response within four weeks. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on August 6.