Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against In-Service Quota in Medical Admissions — Upholds 20% Reservation for In-Service Candidates. The court found that the Government Resolution for in-service candidates was applicable for the current academic year, as it did not change the admission rules midstream.

  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

This appeal arose from a judgment of the Bombay High Court concerning the reservation of 20% seats for in-service candidates in postgraduate medical degree courses in Maharashtra. The National Board of Examinations announced the NEET PG-2022 examination schedule, with results declared on 1 June 2022. On 21 September 2022, the Maharashtra government issued a notice detailing the admission schedule and a brochure outlining the reservation policy, which included provisions for in-service candidates. The appellants challenged the applicability of the Government Resolution dated 26 September 2022, which established the 20% reservation, arguing it was issued after the admission process had begun and thus should not apply for the academic year 2022-23. The High Court dismissed their writ petition, leading to this appeal. The appellants contended that the reservation was disproportionately high, as only 52 out of 282 reserved seats were filled. The State argued that the reservation policy was consistent with prior regulations and did not constitute a change in rules midstream. The Supreme Court analyzed the legal framework, including previous judgments regarding in-service reservations, and concluded that the Government Resolution was valid and applicable for the current academic year. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision.

Headnote

A) Administrative Law - Reservation Policy - Applicability of Government Resolution - Government Resolution dated 26 September 2022 - The court held that the Government Resolution providing for a 20% reservation for in-service candidates was applicable for the current academic year as it did not alter the rules of admission midstream, given that the brochure specified that in-service reservations would abide by government resolutions issued from time to time. The High Court's dismissal of the writ petition was upheld (Paras 30-38).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Government Resolution providing for a 20% reservation for in-service candidates applies to the current academic year after the admission process had commenced.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's judgment that the Government Resolution dated 26 September 2022 was applicable for the current academic year.

Law Points

  • Reservation in admissions
  • in-service candidates
  • NEET-PG
  • Government Resolution
  • eligibility criteria
  • weightage marks
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (SC) (10) 89

Civil Appeal No 7778 of 2022

2022-10-20

Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hima Kohli

Mr. Anand Grover, Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Mr. Sanjay Hegde, Mr. Sudhanshu Choudhari

Nipun Tawari & Ors

The State of Maharashtra & Ors

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

Nature of Litigation

Challenge to the applicability of a Government Resolution regarding reservation for in-service candidates in medical admissions.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought to declare the Government Resolution inapplicable for the current academic year and to conduct admissions without the 20% reservation.

Filing Reason

The appellants argued that the Government Resolution was issued after the admission process had commenced.

Previous Decisions

The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Government Resolution.

Issues

Whether the Government Resolution providing for a 20% reservation for in-service candidates applies to the current academic year after the admission process had commenced.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the Government Resolution was issued after the admission process had commenced and should not apply. State argued that the reservation policy was consistent with prior regulations and did not constitute a change in rules midstream.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Government Resolution did not alter the admission rules midstream as the brochure specified that in-service reservations would abide by government resolutions issued from time to time.

Judgment Excerpts

The court held that the Government Resolution providing for a 20% reservation for in-service candidates was applicable for the current academic year. The High Court's dismissal of the writ petition was upheld.

Procedural History

The appellants filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the applicability of the Government Resolution dated 26 September 2022, which was dismissed, leading to this appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Medical Council of India Regulations: Regulation 9
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging SEBI's Rejection of Condonation of Delay in Settlement Applications. SEBI's refusal to condone delay in filing settlement applications under SEBI (Settlement of Administrative and Civil Proceedings) Re...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Revenue Appeal in Part on Reimbursement of Expenses Taxability Under Income Tax Act, 1961 — Reimbursement of Actual Expenses Not Taxable as Income, but Interest Under Section 234B is Mandatory.