Neil Aurelio Nunes vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 13

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, AS BOPANNA
Neil Aurelio Nunes – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv.
For the WP 961,967/21 : Dr. Charu Mathur, AOR Ms. Tanvi, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Rahul Unnikrishnan, Adv. Mr. Malak Bhatt, Adv.
For the WP 1105/21 : Dr. Charu Mathur, AOR Ms. Tanvi, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dubey, Adv.
For the WP 1002/21 : Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vivek Singh, AOR Mr. Ramesh Allanki, Adv.
For the WP 1021/21 : Mr. Shrirang Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Subodh S. Patil, AOR Mr. Chaitanya Deshpande, Adv. Ms. Supriya Patil, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Mr. K.M. Nataraj, ASG Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Adv. Mr. Vatsal Joshi, Adv. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Adv. Mr. Sugosh Subramaniam, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Vikramajit Banerjee, ASG Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Adv. Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Gaurav Sharma, AOR Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Adv. Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Adv. Mr. Dhawal Mohan, Adv. Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Srirupa Nag, Adv. Mr. Taha Yasin, Adv. Mr. P. Wilson, Sr. Adv. Mr. R. Nedumaran, AOR Ms. Chandra Priya C., Adv. Mr. Mukul Lather, Adv. Mr. A. Mariarputham, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Krishnamurthy, Sr. Adv. AAG Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Mr. V.K. Biju, AOR Ms. Ria Sachthey, Adv. Mr. Chetanya Singh, Adv. Mr. Amlendu Kumar Akhilesh Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Shaji George, Adv. Ms. Vijay Laxmi, Adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka, AOR Ms. Sarvshree, Adv. Mr. Justine George, Adv. Mr. Manas Syal, Adv. Mr. Anand Grover, Sr. Adv. Mr. Apoorve Karol, Adv. Mr. Mithu Jain, AOR Mr. Kartikay Trivedi, Adv. Mr. Subodh S. Patil, AOR Ms. Supriya Patil, Adv. Mr. Chaitanya Deshpande, Adv. Mr. Shashank Ratnoo, Adv. Mr. Vikram Hegde, AOR Mr. Shantanu Lakhotia, Adv. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, AOR Mr. Kumar Prashant, Adv. Ms. Vanya Gupta, Adv. Mr. Avnish Dave, Adv. Mr. Parmod Kumar Vishnoi, Adv. Ms. Himanshi Shakya, Adv. Mr. Varun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Brajesh Pandey, Adv. Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, AOR

ORDER :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J.

1. There is a challenge, in this batch of petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution, to a notice which was issued by the Directorate General of Health Services in the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on 29 July 2021. The notice implements a 27 per cent reservation for Other Backward Classes¹[“OBC”] (non-creamy layer) and a 10 per cent reservation for the Economically Weaker Section,²[“EWS”] while filling up 15 per cent undergraduate and 50 per cent post-graduate³[“PG”] All India Quota⁴[“AIQ”] seats in pursuance of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test⁵[“NEET”]. The notice takes effect from the current admission year, 2021-2022. The petitioners are doctors who appeared in the NEET- PG 2021 examination.

2. The petitions were instituted on 24 August 2021 to challenge the validity of the notice dated 29 July 2021. Notice was issued by this Court on 6 September 2021. The NEET-PG results were announced on 28 September 2021. Arguments were heard in part on 7 October 2021. It was argued that there cannot be any reservation for the OBC and EWS category in the AIQ seats in NEET-PG and that the criteria for the determination of the EWS ca

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 13

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, AS BOPANNANeil Aurelio Nunes – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, AS BOPANNA
Neil Aurelio Nunes – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent