Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against 25% Domicile Reservation At National Law University Jodhpur
The Supreme Court recently dismissed an SLP challenging the Rajasthan High Court judgment upholding 25% domicile-based reservation at National Law University, Jodhpur (NLUJ).A bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar said, “We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution...
The Supreme Court recently dismissed an SLP challenging the Rajasthan High Court judgment upholding 25% domicile-based reservation at National Law University, Jodhpur (NLUJ).
A bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar said, “We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.”
The petition before the High Court was against the NLUJ's Executive Council's Resolution, passed in 2022, introducing the domicile-based reservation for students from Rajasthan, arguing it to be violative of Articles 14 and 15, and lacking any statutory basis.
The Rajasthan High Court had upheld the constitutional validity of the 25% domicile-based reservation at NLUJ, ruling that it did not violate Article 14 as the classification was reasonable, non-arbitrary and bore a rational nexus with the objective of advancing regional educational development.
The division bench of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Chandra Prakash Shrimali noted that many other National Law Universities had already introduced domicile-based reservations. Further, the State of Rajasthan, being the establishing and funding authority of NLUJ, had issued the notification to promote access to legal education for students domiciled in the State, the High Court noted.
The High Court rejected the petitioner's contention that there was no statutory basis for such reservation. It held that the policy fulfilled the twin test of intelligible differentia and rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved, required for permissible classification under Article 14.
The High Court also relied on Supreme Court judgment in Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India which recognised the permissibility of domicile-based preferences in admissions to higher educational institutions established and maintained by a State.
Case no. – Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 25297/2025
Case Title – Anindita Biswas v. National Law University, Jodhpur & Ors.
Click Here To Read/Download Order