Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Surya Kant, JJ.
Neppali Sai Vikash & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Miscellaneous Application No. 735 of 2022 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 124 of 2022
Decided On : 02-05-2022
NEET PG - Medical Education - Post-Graduate Medical Education Regulations 2000 - [Regulation 9(3) of the Post-Graduate Medical Education Regulations 2000, NEET PG courses, Regulation II of the Dental Council of India, Revised BDS Course Regulations 2007] - The court discussed the reduction of percentile for admission to NEET PG courses, the power of the Central Government to lower the minimum marks for admission to PG courses in consultation with the National Medical Commission, and the decision-making process for reducing the percentile. The court found that the reduction of 15 percentile had already made 25,000 more candidates eligible, and further reduction may not be in the best interest of medical education. The court also referred to a previous case where the decision of the Union Government to not reduce the percentile for admission to the BDS course was set aside on the ground of illegality and irrationality. The court concluded that there was no manifest arbitrariness in the decision-making process and dismissed the Miscellaneous Application.
Fact of the Case:
The petition sought a reduction in the percentile for eligibility for NEET PG courses to fill up vacant post graduate medical seats. The Union Government had already carried out a reduction of 15 percentile across all categories for admission to NEET PG courses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the reduction of 15 percentile had already made 25,000 more candidates eligible, and further reduction may not be in the best interest of medical education. The court also referred to a previous case where the decision of the Union Government to not reduce the percentile for admission to the BDS course was set aside on the ground of illegality and irrationality. The court concluded that there was no manifest arbitrariness in the decision-making process and dismissed the Miscellaneous Application.
Issues: The issues included the reduction of percentile for eligibility for NEET PG courses, the power of the Central Government to lower the minimum marks for admission to PG courses in consultation with the National Medical Commission, and the decision-making process for reducing the percentile.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the reduction of 15 percentile had already made 25,000 more candidates eligible, and further reduction may not be in the best interest of medical education. The court also referred to a previous case where the decision of the Union Government to not reduce the percentile for admission to the BDS course was set aside on the ground of illegality and irrationality. The court concluded that there was no manifest arbitrariness in the decision-making process and dismissed the Miscellaneous Application.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the Miscellaneous Application seeking revival of the petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, as it found no merit in the application.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
The Supreme Court of India dismissed the miscellaneous application seeking to revive the petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, after finding no merit in the application (!) (!) .
The petitioners had initially sought a reduction in the percentile cutoff for NEET PG admission to fill vacant postgraduate medical seats, which the Union Government had already reduced by 15 percentile (!) .
The court noted that the reduction of 15 percentile had already increased eligibility by approximately 25,000 candidates, and further reduction might not be in the best interest of medical education (!) (!) .
The decision-making process of the Union Government in reducing the percentile was found to be free from manifest arbitrariness, considering the data on seat vacancies, candidate eligibility, and the impact on medical education standards (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The court emphasized that the reduction in eligibility criteria was a policy decision taken after due consultation, and judicial review should not interfere unless there is clear arbitrariness or irrationality (!) .
The court acknowledged that a significant number of seats remained vacant, but the decision to not further reduce the percentile was justified by considerations of merit, quality of medical education, and the potential impact on the academic schedule (!) (!) .
The court referred to prior judgments that addressed similar issues, noting the importance of balancing the need to fill vacancies with maintaining standards of medical training and the integrity of the selection process (!) .
The application for an additional counselling round or further reduction of eligibility criteria was rejected on the grounds that the current process and decisions were reasonable, and further intervention by the court was unwarranted (!) .
The court also disposed of related interlocutory applications, including those for impleadment, as they no longer required orders following the disposal of the main application (!) .
If you need further analysis or specific legal advice related to this case, please let me know.
JUDGMENT
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J. - The Miscellaneous Application seeks revival of the petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. The petition was disposed of by an order dated 14 March 2022.
2. The grievance in the petition was that there were vacant post graduate medical seats and a reduction in the percentile fixed for eligibility will ensure that more candidates become eligible to fill up the vacancies.
3. The Union Government in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare1["MoH&FW"] took a decision on 12 March 2022 to carry out a reduction of 15 percentile across all categories for admission to NEET PG courses. For the general category, the cut-off percentile has been fixed at 35, for the physically handicapped category at 30 and for the reserved SC/ST categories at 25.
4. Mr. Prashant Bhushan, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submits that even with the reduction which has been effected, there are still about 1,500 seats which are vacant in the states' quota and, hence, if a further reduction of 5 percentile is effected, some more candidates would be able to gain admission. Moreover, counsel submitted that in the previous year, there was a reduction of 20 percentile and hence a further reduction of 5 percentile for this year may be considered because of the pandemic.
5. Ms Aishwarya Bhati, Additional Solicitor General, has tendered a statement on behalf of MoH&FW, which is extracted in its entirety for convenience of reference:
"Mop up Round
| Total Seats | Joined | Vacant |
| 6206 | 4,747 | 1459 |
| Total Seats | Joined | Vacant |
Stray Round
| Total Seats | Allotted* | Vacant |
| 1459 | 1177 | 282** |
*Results to be declared on 2nd May 2022. Last day of reporting is 7th May 2022.
** Most of the seats that remain vacant are pre-para. These subjects are teaching subjects and usually remain vacant.
There are currently 600 seats under counselling for the deemed universities and the counselling would be completed by 7th May 2022.
The petitioner has prayed for an additional round of mop-up round to be conducted and to permit and facilitate the petitioners/ applicants and also similarly situated to participate in the NEET-PG Counselling 2021 and allot of the vacant seats under the available quota for the academic year 2021-22, from amongst all candidates who appeared for the NEET PG 2021 with no qualifying mark.
It is pertinent to mention that the current curriculum is already 4 months behind schedule and the another round of counselling is not in the best academic interest of the students. Further, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has decided in consultation with the National Medical Commission has decided that there shall be a reduction across all categories of 15 percentile for admission to the NEET PG courses. Thus, for the general category, the cut-off percentile is 35, for the physically handicapped general category 30 and for the reserved SC/ST 25.
There are around 40,000 seats that are available for NEET PG counselling. 92,000 candidates/doctors were initially eligible for counselling for these seats. However, when the percentile was lowered vide communication dated 12th May 2022, another 25,000 candidates became eligible. Therefore, there are sufficient candidates that are available for counselling for the vacant seats and further lowering of percentile would not be in the interest of the public at large because the doctors have to deal with life and death situations and merit cannot given a complete go-by."
6. The above statement indicates that initially 92,000 candidates were eligible for counselling for nearly 40,000 seats which were available for the post graduate courses. After the lowering of the percentile, 25,000 more candidates became eligible. A total of 6,206 seats were available in the mop up round and after 4,747 candidates joined, 1,459 seats remained vacant. In the stray round,
The decision of the Union Government to not reduce the percentile for admission to the BDS course was set aside on the ground of illegality and irrationality. The court found that there was no manife....
The Court emphasized the need to maintain high standards in Super Specialty courses and declined to reduce the eligibility percentile, citing the apex nature of these courses.
The court emphasized the need for balanced admission policies to fill vacancies in Homoeopathy colleges without compromising educational standards, recommending criteria for effective implementation ....
: If the criteria for minimum percentile is further reduced, this Court is doubtful about the standard of the students taking admission and is wary of their potential to undertake the professional co....
The discretion vested by Regulation 2(d) is applicable in a situation where there are insufficient candidates in the respective categories who have scored the minimum marks in the NEET. Interference ....
Discretion under regulations for educational admissions must be exercised considering only pertinent factors, and the Union's refusal to further lower NEET percentile requirements was lawful given th....
(1) Judicial review of administrative action is permissible on grounds of illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety – An administrative decision is flawed if it is illegal.(2) If reducing ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
