Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 288

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L. NAGESWARA RAO, B.R. GAVAI, JJ.
Dr. N. Karthikeyan and Others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 53 of 2022, 1299 of 2020, Civil Appeal Nos. 2065, 2066 of 2022, 3840, 3841-3843 of 2020, SLP (C) Nos. 2514 of 2022, 13557 of 2020
Decided On : 16-03-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr.Adv. Ms. Purvi Mathur,Adv. Ms. Kushagra Sharma,Adv. Mr. Anuj Bhandari, Adv Mr. Dushyant Dave,Sr.Adv. Ms. Purvi Mathur,Adv. Ms. Kushagra Sharma,Adv. Mr. Anuj Bhandari, Adv Mr. Shivendra Singh, AOR Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, AOR Mr. Shankar Narayanan, Adv. Mr. Suhrith Parthasarathy, Adv. Ms. Amritha Satyajith, Adv. Ms. Ishita Chowdhury,Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. A. Selvin Raja, AOR Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv. 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. C. S. Vaidyanathan, Sr Adv Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AAG. Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AoR. Ms. Mary Mitzy, Adv. Ms. Devyani Gupta, Adv. Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. C. K. Sasi, AOR Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR Mr. Gaurav Sharma, AOR Mr. P.Wilson,Sr.Adv, Mr. Sankaran.Adv, Mr. K.V.Jagdishvaran,Adv, Mrs.G.Indira,Aor, Ms. Habilila Nana,Adv, Ms. SreePriya,Adv, Mr. Gandeepan,Adv Mr. Gaurav Sharma, AOR Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv Mr. Dhawal Mohan, Adv

The State of Tamil Nadu is within its competence to provide reservation for in-service candidates seeking admission to postgraduate degree/diploma medical courses, including Super Specialty seats, as per the judgment of the Constitution Bench in the case of Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association (supra).

Headnote:
Reservation - Super Specialty Seats - Constitution Bench Judgments - Indra Sawhney and Others vs. Union of India and Others, 1992 Supp. (3) SCC 217; Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Another vs. State of M.P. and Others, (1999) 7 SCC 120; Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others, (2021) 6 SCC 568 - NEET-SS 2021 Information Bulletin - Regulation 9 of the MCI Regulations, 2000 - Separate Channel/Source of Entry for In-Service Candidates - Validity of G.O. (Ms.) No. 462 dated 7th November, 2020
Fact of the Case:

The case involves a challenge to the validity of G.O. (Ms.) No. 462 dated 7th November, 2020, issued by the Health and Family Welfare (MCA-1) Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu, which reserved 50% Super Specialty seats for in-service candidates in Government Medical Colleges in the State of Tamil Nadu.
Finding of the Court:

The Court rejected the prayer to continue the interim protection granted for the academic year 2020-2021, holding that the State of Tamil Nadu is within its competence to continue the counselling for academic year 2021-2022 by considering the reservation provided by it as per the said G.O.
Issues: Validity of reservation of 50% Super Specialty seats for in-service candidates in Government Medical Colleges in Tamil Nadu
Ratio Decidendi: The Court was guided by the judgment of the Constitution Bench in the case of Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association (supra) rather than the judgment of the Constitution Bench in the case of Dr. Preeti Srivastava (supra) in determining the validity of the reservation.
Final Decision: The Court rejected the prayer to continue the interim protection granted for the academic year 2020-2021 and allowed the State of Tamil Nadu to continue the counselling for academic year 2021-2022 by considering the reservation provided by it as per the said G.O.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.

2. Rule granted in the Writ Petitions.

3. Writ Petition (Civil) No. 53 of 2022 challenges the validity of G.O. (Ms.) No. 462 dated 7th November, 2020, issued by the Health and Family Welfare (MCA-1) Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu (hereinafter referred to as “the said G.O.”). The basic contention of the writ petitioners is that the reservation of 50% Super Specialty seats (DM/M.Ch.) for in-service candidates in Government Medical Colleges in the State of Tamil Nadu is not permissible in law.

4. Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 2514 of 2022 challenges the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 12th January, 2022, vide which, the said High Court has issued a direction to the Director of Medical Education, Kilpauk, Chennai to implement the said G.O. for the academic year 2021-2022 itself, if there is no legal impediment to do the same.

5. This Court vide interim order dated 27th November, 2020, passed in Civil Appeal No. 3840 of 2020 [Dr. Prerit Sharma and Others vs. Dr. Bilu B.S. and Others] had directed that the counselling for admission to Super Specialty Medical Courses for the academic year 2020-2021 shall proceed without providing for reservations to in-service doctors.

6. The writ petitioners as well as the appellants in the present case have urged this Court to continue the aforesaid interim order of this Court dated 27th November, 2020 (supra), even for the academic year 2021-2022.

7. Per contra, this request made by the writ petitioners/appellants is vehemently opposed by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State as well as the in-service candidates.

8. We have, therefore, heard the learned counsels for the parties on the limited question, as to whether the interim protection, which was granted for the academic year 2020-2021, vide order dated 27th November, 2020 (supra), should also be continued for the academic year 2021-2022 or not.

9. We have heard Shri Dushyant Dave, Shri Shyam Divan and Shri Gopal Sankaranarayanan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners/ appellants as well as Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General (“ASG”) appearing for the Union of India.

10. Shri C.S. Vaidyanathan, learned Senior Counsel and Shri Amit Anand Tiwari, learned Additional Advocate General (“AAG”) have made submissions on behalf of the State of Tamil Nadu and Shri P. Wilson, learned Senior Counsel has argued on behalf of the in-service doctors.

11. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners/appellants submitted that the nine-judge Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Indra Sawhney and Others vs. Union of India and Others, 1992 Supp. (3) SCC 217 as well as Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Another vs. State of M.P. and Others, (1999) 7 SCC 120 have specifically held that there cannot be any reservation for admission in Super Specialty courses. It is submitted that NEET-SS 2021 Information Bulletin (hereinafter referred to as “NEET Bulletin”), in clause 10.10, specifically states that, as per judgment of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 350 of 1998, there is no reservation of seats for Super Specialty (DM/M.Ch.) courses. It is submitted that the case of Dr. Sweety Bhartiya vs. State of M.P. and Others, which is referred to in the NEET Bulletin, is a case which was a part of the batch of cases disposed of by this Court in the case of Dr. Preeti Srivastava (supra).

12. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that since the matters regarding coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions are squarely covered by Item 66 in List-I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, it is the Regulation issued by the Medical Council of India,