Discriminatory residency requirements in admission criteria to medical college violate central guidelines and constitutional equality provisions.

JUDGMENT :

MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.

1. Heard Mr. C. T. Jamir, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. I. Imchen, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard K.N. Balgopal, learned Advocate General, assisted by Ms. V. Shokhrie, learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. Moa Imchen, learned Senior Govt. Advocate, Mr. V. Rio, Mr. V. Kense and Ms. N. Nambiar, learned counsel appearing for the State of Nagaland as well as Mr. Yangerwati, learned Central Government Counsel.

2. By this common judgment, this Court proposes to dispose of two connected writ petitions, namely, WP(C) No. 134/2025 and WP(C) No. 138/2025. Both the writ petitions were filed by the petitioner, Ms. Vatsala Panghal, who had appeared in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (herein after referred to as “NEET”) for admission into MBBS course in one of the Medical Colleges of India from the central pool meant for the State of Nagaland.

3. It is pertinent to mention here that for the academic year 2025- 26, total 152 numbers of seats are available for MBBS course for the State of Nagaland. Out of these 152 seats, 42 seats are allocated in 30 different Medical Colleges of India from the central pool for the State of Nagaland.

4. The petitioner is the daughter of Colonel Lovelesh Panghal, presently posted as the Commanding Officer of 1 Nagaland Battalion, NCC at Kohima. As such, claiming to be a ward of employee of the Central Govt. posted in and having his headquarter in the State of Nagaland, she had applied for a seat in MBBS course out of the seats allocated to the State of Nagaland from the central pool. In the NEET, the petitioner secured 455 marks out of total 720 marks and has secured 113803 all India rank.

5. However, in the merit list of provisionally selected candidates for the State of Nagaland prepared on the basis of marks obtained in NEET (UG) for the academic sessions 2025-26, the name of the petitioner did not figure. Her name figures in the list of category-III at Annexure-B and in the remarks column no reason has been mentioned for non-inclusion of her name in the merit list of provisionally selected candidate.

6. As the petitioner’s name did not appear in the reject list, neither did it appear in the merit list of the provisional selected candidates of Nagaland State NEET(UG), in spite of the fact that she secured 455 marks, which is more than the marks secured by the candidate who is placed at second rank in the merit list of the provisional selected candidates of Nagaland State NEET(UG) published by the Director, Directorate of Technical Education, Nagaland (respondent no.3), the petitioner preferred the writ petition (C) No.134/2025.

7. In the said writ petition by order dated 28.07.2025, a Coordinate Bench of this Court directed the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to participate provisionally in the counseling for allocation of seats for MBBS course for the State of Nagaland, which was to be held on 30.07.2025, however, it was held on 04.08.2025. The respondents were also directed to explore the possibilities of keeping one seat vacant without halting the admission process for others, pending disposal of the writ petition filed by the petitioner.

8. During the course of hearing of the WP(C) No.134/2025, the learned Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the State of Nagaland produced a copy of the Notification No. HTE/RESERVE/23-1/2012/474 dated 09.09.2021 issued by the Govt. of Nagaland, Higher and Technical Education Department. The said notification lays down the guidelines for selection of candidates to the state reserved seats u