The Supreme Court of India addressed the appeals challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court's decision regarding the allotment of MBBS seats. The case involved meritorious reserved category students who sought admission under the Unreserved (UR) Government School (GS) quota. The Supreme Court ruled that the sub-classification of candidates into various reserved categories for GS quota seats was unlawful. The Court affirmed that candidates from reserved categories, if meritorious, should be considered under the UR-GS quota, thus protecting their rightful admission.

Introduction

The Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment regarding the MBBS admissions in Madhya Pradesh, focusing on the allocation of seats under the Unreserved Government School quota. The case involved appeals from students of reserved categories who contended that their merit was overlooked due to sub-classification under various reserved categories.

Background

The appellants, belonging to reserved categories, had cleared the NEET-UG 2023 exam and sought admission under the Unreserved Government School quota. However, the Madhya Pradesh Department of Medical Education sub-classified these seats into UR-GS, OBC-GS, SC-GS, ST-GS, and EWS-GS, which led to less meritorious candidates securing seats in the UR-GS category while more meritorious reserved category students were excluded.

Legal Challenge

The appellants filed writ petitions challenging this sub-classification and the subsequent denial of seats. The High Court dismissed their petitions, prompting the appeals to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court's Decision

The Supreme Court held that the sub-classification of horizontal reservation seats into different reserved categories was not sustainable in law. It reiterated the principle that meritorious reserved category candidates should be considered under the general category for horizontal reservation seats. The Court emphasized that the open category should be based purely on merit, irrespective of the candidate's reserved status.

Impact and Relief

Acknowledging the completion of the admission process for the academic session 2023-24, the Court directed that the appellants be considered for admission in the next academic session. This judgment reaffirms the importance of merit in the allocation of seats and sets a precedent for similar cases in the future.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's judgment in this case underscores the principle that merit should be the primary criterion in horizontal reservation categories, ensuring that deserving candidates are not deprived of their rightful opportunities due to procedural anomalies.