Cuttack, Aug. 23: Orissa’s higher education department’s change in modality for grant of quota to sportspersons for admission in Plus Two junior colleges this year has come under cloud.

On August 5, secretary of the higher education department circulated a letter to Plus Two junior colleges to allow admission to candidates claiming reservation under sports quota on the basis of certificates counter-signed by the assistant director (physical education) and the director (higher secondary education).

The Nationalist Lawyers Forum, however, has filed a PIL challenging the new norm in Orissa High Court.

Forum secretaryNishikanta Mishra said the norm, prescribed by the government eight years ago, had been moulded to facilitate admission to the son of a minister at Ravenshaw Junior College.

“The higher education department issued the circular after the minister’s son had not been allowed to take admission in sports quota as he failed to produce a certificate counter-signed by director of sports and youth services and director of secondary education,” Mishra contended in his petition filed on Monday.

The Orissa government had issued guidelines for grant of sports quota during admission in educational institutions through a resolution on November 21, 2003.

The resolution had stated that all certificates, issued by the concerned institutions to sportspersons taking part in state as well as national and international events, were to be counter-signed by director of sports and youth services and director of secondary education.

The candidates were expected to submit the certificates, along with the application form for admission, in a college or institution, if any claim for reservation in sports quota is made.

“The colleges and educational institutions had since been following the government resolution while allowing admission to students. However, secretary of the department of higher education issued the circular while admission process for 2011-12 was on,” the petition contended.

While seeking quashing of the circular as it was “illegal” and “contrary to the government resolution issued on November 21, 2003”, the PIL is yet to be taken up for hearing by the high court.