The court affirmed the management's right to challenge state restrictions on admission based on domicile, emphasizing adherence to established guidelines that permit domicile-free management quotas.

JUDGMENT :

Muralee Krishna, J.

These writ appeals are filed under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, challenging the respective judgments dated 23.10.2024 in W.P.(C)No.33768 of 2024 and the judgment dated 17.03.2025 in W.P.(C)No.10508 of 2025, by the petitioners in those writ petitions. The 1^st petitioner in both the writ petitions is the Kerala State Indian System of Medicine Self-Financing College Management Association (KISMA), which is a registered Association of Ayurveda Colleges functioning in the State of Kerala in the self-financing stream. The remaining petitioners in the writ petitions are the Medical Colleges that are members of KISMA offering courses in Ayurveda. Since the issue involved in both these writ appeals are one and the same, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. For convenience of reference, the parties and documents are referred to in this judgment as they were referred to in W.P.(C) No.33768 of 2024 and corresponding writ appeal, unless otherwise stated.

2. The grievance of the petitioners in the writ petitions is that the process resorted by the 5^th respondent Commissioner for Entrance Examinations for allotment of seats in the Colleges under the Association of the 1^st petitioner was not by following the procedure stipulated in Ext.P2 communication dated 22.08.2024 and Ext.P2(a) order dated 03.09.2024 issued by the 1^st respondent National Commission for Indian Systems of Medicine. According to the petitioners, the word management quota used in Ext.P4 prospectus for admission to Professional Degree Courses, 2024, published by the 5^th respondent, has been misconstrued. When eligibility and qualification criteria are provided in Exts.P2 and P2(a) order, the eligibility criteria laid down in Ext.P4 prospectus have no legal existence. It is the case of the petitioners that, as per Ext.P2, the total seats available in Government, Government-aided institutions and private institutions were divided into two categories, in which 15% thereof are set apart as all India quota and 85% are set apart as State-Union Territory quota. As per Clause 4 of Ext.P2, the management seats under the State-Union Territory quota in private institutions shall be treated as domicile-free. However, while carrying out the admission process by way of Ext.P4 prospectus, the respondents are insisting on the nativity certificate and thereby confining the opportunity of admission to students from the State of Kerala. Therefore, the educational institutions are deprived of students from outside the State, which affects the quality and homogeneous character of the campus. In W.P.(C) No.33768 of 2024, the petitioners sought the following reliefs:

“i. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext.P4 eligibility criteria and to quash the same as the stipulation of eligibility provided therein cannot be made applicable for the BAMS/BSMS/BUMS and post graduate courses;

ii. Issue a writ declaring that admission for BAMS/BSMS/BUMS and Post graduate courses in private self-financing institutions including admissions in the All India quota and NRI quota can only be made without insisting on the domicile restriction as contained in Ext.P4 which run contrary to the stipulations in Exts.P2 & P2(a);

iii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the 5^th respondent to invite fresh applications and allotment for the unfilled seats for the BAMS/BSMS/BUMS and post-graduate courses following the stipulations contained in Ext.P2 and P2(a) as it will override the stipulations in Ext.P4.”

3. In W.P.(C) No.33768 of 2024, on behalf of the 1^st respondent, a statement dated 03.10.2024 has been fi