Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging NRI Definition for PG Medical Admissions — Petitioner Denied NRI Quota Based on Aunt's Residency. Court upholds Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025 restricting NRI status to blood relatives in direct lineal line, rejecting claim based on collateral relative.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Prosecution
  • 89
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Padmaja Sanjay Ladda, a student who completed MBBS from MGM University, Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. She sought admission to postgraduate medical courses (MD/MS) for the academic year 2025-2026 under the NRI/OCI quota in the State of Maharashtra. The cause of action arose from Notice No. 02 for NEET-PG 2025 dated 30.10.2025 issued by the State Common Entrance Test Cell, Mumbai, which prescribed eligibility criteria for NRI candidates based on the amended definition of 'Non-Resident Indian' introduced by Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025 dated 25.06.2025, subsequently enacted into law. The petitioner challenged the notice, ordinance, and the Act, arguing that they were illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to Union Government guidelines and Supreme Court precedents. She claimed eligibility through her real aunt (father's sister) residing in the United Kingdom. The respondents, including the Union of India, State of Maharashtra, and the Medical Counselling Committee, defended the ordinance as a valid exercise of state legislative competence to prevent misuse of NRI quota. The court analyzed the legislative competence under Entry 25 of List III, the definition of 'blood relative', and the object of the ordinance. It held that the State has the power to define NRI for medical admissions, and the amended definition restricting NRI status to blood relatives in the ascending or descending line (parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren) is valid. The petitioner's aunt, being a collateral relative, does not qualify. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the notice and ordinance, and directed the respondents to proceed with admissions as per the existing rules.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Legislative Competence - State Ordinance - The State of Maharashtra has the legislative competence to define 'Non-Resident Indian' for the purpose of medical admissions under Entry 25 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. The Ordinance No. VI of 2025 is not ultra vires the Constitution or the Medical Council of India Act, 1956. (Paras 10-15)

B) Medical Education - NRI Quota - Definition of NRI - The amended definition of 'Non-Resident Indian' under Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025, which restricts NRI status to blood relatives in the ascending or descending line (i.e., parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren), is valid and does not include collateral relatives such as aunts or uncles. The petitioner's claim based on her real aunt (father's sister) does not satisfy the eligibility criteria. (Paras 16-20)

C) Interpretation of Statutes - Blood Relative - The term 'blood relative' in the context of NRI quota must be interpreted strictly to mean relatives by consanguinity in the direct lineal line, excluding collateral relatives. The court relied on the principle of ejusdem generis and the object of the ordinance to prevent misuse of NRI quota. (Paras 21-25)

D) Administrative Law - Notice Validity - Notice No. 02 for NEET-PG 2025 dated 30.10.2025 issued by the State Common Entrance Test Cell, adopting the amended definition of NRI, is valid and not arbitrary. The notice is consistent with the ordinance and the guidelines issued by the Union Government. (Paras 26-30)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the amended definition of 'Non-Resident Indian' introduced by Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025, which restricts NRI status to blood relatives in the ascending or descending line, is valid and applicable to postgraduate medical admissions for the academic year 2025-2026, and whether the petitioner, who relies on her real aunt (father's sister) as an NRI sponsor, is eligible for admission under the NRI quota.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is dismissed. The court upheld the validity of Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025 and Notice No. 02 for NEET-PG 2025. The petitioner is not eligible for NRI quota based on her aunt's residency. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Definition of Non-Resident Indian
  • NRI quota eligibility
  • Postgraduate medical admissions
  • State legislative competence
  • Ordinance validity
  • Blood relative interpretation
  • Article 226 jurisdiction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025:BHC-AUG:35796-DB

Writ Petition No.13188 of 2025

2025-12-01

Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, Hiten S. Venegavkar

2025:BHC-AUG:35796-DB

Mr. Anand Indrale Patil h/f Mr. Vinod P. Patil for Petitioner, Mr. S.W. Mumde for Respondents 1 and 5, Mr. Pralhad Paranjape a/w Ms. Tirtha Pawar for Respondent 4, Mr. S.K. Tambe for Respondents 2,3 and 6

Padmaja d/o. Sanjay Ladda

Union of India, State of Maharashtra, Hon'ble Advocate General, Commissioner/Competent Authority State Common Entrance Test Cell, Medical Counselling Committee, Higher and Technical Educational Department

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 challenging the validity of a state ordinance and notice defining NRI eligibility for postgraduate medical admissions.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of Notice No. 02 for NEET-PG 2025 dated 30.10.2025, quashing of Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025 and the Act replacing it, and a declaration that the petitioner is eligible for NRI quota.

Filing Reason

The petitioner was denied NRI quota eligibility because her sponsor (real aunt) is not a blood relative in the ascending or descending line as per the amended definition.

Issues

Whether the amended definition of NRI under Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025 is ultra vires the Constitution and the Medical Council of India Act? Whether the petitioner, relying on her real aunt as an NRI sponsor, is eligible for admission under the NRI quota?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the ordinance is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to Union Government guidelines and Supreme Court precedents. Respondents argued that the State has legislative competence to define NRI for medical admissions and the amended definition prevents misuse of NRI quota.

Ratio Decidendi

The State has legislative competence under Entry 25 of List III to define 'Non-Resident Indian' for medical admissions. The amended definition restricting NRI status to blood relatives in the ascending or descending line is valid and not ultra vires. The term 'blood relative' does not include collateral relatives like aunts. The petitioner's claim fails.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner challenges the said notice insofar as it applies the amended definition of NRI and prays for its quashing. The State of Maharashtra has the legislative competence to define 'Non-Resident Indian' for the purpose of medical admissions under Entry 25 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. The amended definition of 'Non-Resident Indian' under Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025, which restricts NRI status to blood relatives in the ascending or descending line, is valid.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.13188 of 2025 before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, challenging Notice No. 02 for NEET-PG 2025 and Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025. The court heard the matter on 01.12.2025 and dismissed the petition.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
  • Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025:
  • Medical Council of India Act, 1956:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused in Murder Case After Eye Witness Turns Hostile. The court found that the sole eye witness not supporting the prosecution constituted a change in circumstance under Section 439 CrPC, entitling the accused...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging NRI Definition for PG Medical Admissions — Petitioner Denied NRI Quota Based on Aunt's Residency. Court upholds Maharashtra Ordinance No. VI of 2025 restricting NRI status to blood relatives in direc...