Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SANJAY V. GANGAPURWALA, P.D. AUDIKESAVALU, JJ.
Gurubaran & Others – Appellants
Versus
The Union of India Rep. By its Secretary to Government Ministry of Health and Family Welfare New Delhi & Others – Respondents
W.P. Nos. 18430 & 18431 of 2023
Decided On : 14-08-2023
WRIT PETITION - Regulation 9(4) of the Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 - Validity - Whether Regulation 9(4) of the Regulations, 2000 is illegitimate, illegal and ultra vires the National Medical Commission Act 2019 and the Constitution of India insofar as it permits State Governments to provide incentives to in-service candidates participating in the Open Category of Post Graduate Medical Admission Counselling - Whether G.O (Ms.) No.463, dated 7.11.2020, by virtue of which the in-service candidates are allowed to participate in the open competition category with the advantage of additional weightage marks allotted to them for serving in rural, remote and/or difficult areas, so also by the direction mandating that 50% of the State quota seats in the Post Graduate (MD, MS and MDS) Degree courses in Tamil Nadu Government Medical Colleges and Government seats in Self-Financing Medical Colleges affiliated to the Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University be exclusively allocated for in-service doctors serving in Government Health Institutions in the State of Tamil Nadu is arbitrary, unjust, illegal and ultra vires Regulation 9(4) of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 and the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners are desirous of seeking admission to the Post-Graduate Medical Courses. The present writ petitions are filed assailing Regulation 9(4) of the Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 [hereinafter referred to as “the Regulations, 2000”] insofar as it permits the State Governments to provide incentives to in-service candidates participating in the open category of the Postgraduate Medical Admission Counselling. The petitioners also assail G.O (Ms.) No.463, dated 7.11.2020, by virtue of which the in-service candidates are allowed to participate in the open competition category with the advantage of additional weightage marks allotted to them for serving in rural, remote and/or difficult areas, so also by the direction mandating that 50% of the State quota seats in the Post Graduate (MD, MS and MDS) Degree courses in Tamil Nadu Government Medical Colleges and Government seats in Self-Financing Medical Colleges affiliated to the Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University be exclusively allocated for in-service doctors serving in Government Health Institutions in the State of Tamil Nadu.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that Regulation 9(4) of the Regulations, 2000 and G.O.(Ms.) No.463, dated 07.11.2020 do not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness. The policy of providing incentive marks to the in-service candidates and adding the incentive marks for competing with the open category candidates is not barred by any statute, Rules or Regulations.
Issues: 1. Whether Regulation 9(4) of the Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 is illegitimate, illegal and ultra vires the National Medical Commission Act 2019 and the Constitution of India insofar as it permits State Governments to provide incentives to in-service candidates participating in the Open Category of Post Graduate Medical Admission Counselling? 2. Whether G.O (Ms.) No.463, dated 7.11.2020, by virtue of which the in-service candidates are allowed to participate in the open competition category with the advantage of additional weightage marks allotted to them for serving in rural, remote and/or difficult areas, so also by the direction mandating that 50% of the State quota seats in the Post Graduate (MD, MS and MDS) Degree courses in Tamil Nadu Government Medical Colleges and Government seats in Self-Financing Medical Colleges affiliated to the Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University be exclusively allocated for in-service doctors serving in Government Health Institutions in the State of Tamil Nadu is arbitrary, unjust, illegal and ultra vires Regulation 9(4) of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 and the Constitution of India?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the policy of providing incentive marks to the in-service candidates and adding the incentive marks for competing with the open category candidates is not barred by any statute, Rules or Regulations. 2. The court also held that Regulation 9(4) of the Regulations, 2000 and G.O.(Ms.) No.463, dated 07.11.2020 do not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness.
Final Decision: The writ petitions are disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: W.P.No.18430 of 2023:Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of declaration declaring Regulation 9(4) of the Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 as illegitimate, illegal and ultra vires the National Medical Commission Act 2019 and the Constitution of India insofar as it permits State Governments to provide incentives to in-service candidates participating in the Open Category of Post Graduate Medical Admission Counselling.
W.P.No.18431 of 2023: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent contained in G.O.(Ms.) No.463, dated 07.11.2020 and to quash the same as arbitrary, unjust, illegal and ultra vires Regulation 9(4) of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 and the Constitution of India and to direct the 2nd respondent to treat “in service” and “non-service” candidates on par in making admissions to Post Graduate Degree seats in Tamil Nadu Government Medical Colleges and Government seats in Self-Financing Medical Colleges affiliated to the Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University.)
The Honourable Chief Justice
1. The petitioners herein are desirous of seeking admission to the Post-Graduate Medical Courses.
2. The present writ petitions are filed assailing Regulation 9(4) of the Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 [hereinafter referred to as “the Regulations, 2000”] insofar as it permits the State Governments to provide incentives to in-service candidates participating in the open category of the Postgraduate Medical Admission Counselling. The petitioners also assail G.O (Ms.) No.463, dated 7.11.2020, by virtue of which the in-service candidates are allowed to participate in the open competition category with the advantage of additional weightage marks allotted to them for serving in rural, remote and/or difficult areas, so also by the direction mandating that 50% of the State quota seats in the Post Graduate (MD, MS and MDS) Degree courses in Tamil Nadu Government Medical Colleges and Government seats in Self-Financing Medical Colleges affiliated to the Tamil Nadu Dr.M.G.R.Medical University be exclusively allocated for in-service doctors serving in Government Health Institutions in the State of Tamil Nadu.
3.1. Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy, learned counsel for the petitioners, during the course of his lucid submissions, canvassed the following propositions:
(a) The policy of exclusively allocating 50% of seats for in-service candidates and further allowing in-service candidates to apply in the open category and awarding incentive marks to in-service candidates in both categories introduced since the year 2021-2022 is illegitimate on the grounds:
(i)The reservation of 50% in favour of in-service doctors is arbitrary, unreasonable and disproportionate. The State of Tamil Nadu is the only State that reserves as many as 50% of Postgraduate seats in favour of in-service doctors. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. T.Dhilipkumar, (1996) 5 SCALE 208 (2), to submit that the Apex Court in the said case directed the State of Tamil Nadu to appoint a highly qualified committee to determine year to year what ought to be the percentage-wise reservation required for in-service category having regard to the then prevailing situation and reduce the percentage of 50%, if found appropriate. The State has failed to appoint such a Committee to re-consider the percentage-wise reservation on a yearly basis. It has also failed to reduce the 50% reservation granted to in-service doctors.
(ii)Though such reservation was discontinued for the academic years 2018-2019, 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, in-service candidates remained largely una
The policy of providing incentive marks to the in-service candidates and adding the incentive marks for competing with the open category candidates is not barred by any statute, Rules or Regulations.
State regulations regarding post-graduate medical course admissions supersede national standards, and weightage for rural service is not a statutory right.
Merit must prevail in admission to postgraduate medical courses; state can implement service quotas, but must not dilute merit standards.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the Ext.P9 Prospectus violated merit-based admission criteria, the splitting up of in-service quota seats and provision of service weigh....
The State cannot issue a notification identifying remote and/or difficult areas for the purpose of granting incentives to in-service candidates for admission to Post Graduate Medical/ Dental Courses ....
Weightage for medical admissions based on rural service is permissible only for candidates serving in difficult rural areas, as established by statutory provisions and prior judgments.
The court upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 1.20(9) and declared Rule 1.8(2) as ultra vires for being violative of Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 and counter to the decisi....
The Government Resolution dated 26 September 2022 providing for a reservation of 20% for in-service candidates was held to be applicable for the current academic year and in consonance with the broch....
The court affirmed the necessity of extending admission incentives to all in-service medical professionals, not just specific categories, upholding public interest and compliance with MCI regulations....
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
