Domicile restrictions for admissions in minority institutions violate the equality clause under Article 14, mandating that PG medical course admissions be based on merit rather than residence.

JUDGMENT :

(ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

A common order is passed in the Writ Appeal and Writ Petitions, since the issue arising for determination is one and the same.

2. W.A.No.1568 of 2018 and W.P.No.8669 of 2018 have been filed by the Puducherry Institute of Medical Sciences (in short, either appellant or PIMS). The Government of Puducherry, represented by the Under Secretary to Government (Health) is arrayed as R1 in both the Writ Appeal and the Writ Petition and the Central Admissions Committee (CENTAC) is arrayed as R2 in the Writ Appeal and R3 in W.P.No.8669 of 2018. The Medical Council of India (MCI) is arrayed as R2 only in the Writ Petition and not in the Writ Appeal.

3. W.P.No.8894 of 2018 is at the instance of Sri Venkateswara Medical College Hospital and Research Centre (hereinafter referred to as petitioner). The Union Territory of Puducherry, represented by the Under Secretary to Government (Health) is arrayed as R1, the Director, Directorate of Health and Family Welfare Services is arrayed as R2 and CENTAC and MCI are arrayed as R3 and R4 respectively.

4. The prayer before the Writ Court by PIMS was for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the Government of Puducherry dated 07.03.2019 and quash of the same. The impugned order was the seat matrix stipulating the college-wise minority quota seats for admission to students in Post Graduate (PG) Medical Courses for academic year 2019-20. The Writ Petition had come to be dismissed by order dated 11.04.2019.

5. The question that was crystallized for determination by the learned Judge was whether PIMS, being a Christian Minority Institution is bound to admit 50% of the total intake of Christian students only from Puducherry or from other States also.

6. In dismissing the Writ Petition, the learned Judge followed the ratio of the judgment of the nine Hon’ble Judges of the Supreme Court in P.A. Inamdar and Others V. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2005) 6 SCC 537 particularly paragraphs 133 to 135 onwards, wherein mention has also been made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation and Others V. State of Karnataka and Others, (2002) 8 SCC 481.

7. The Writ Court holds that though the minority institutions are free to admit students of its own religion, the Institute cannot admit students from neighbouring States, wherein the same religion may not be a minority. The operative portion of the impugned order, at paragraphs 18 to 20 are as follows:

18. It has been categorically held that though the minority institute is free to admit the students of its own religion, the institute cannot admit the students from neighbouring states, wherein, the same religion may not be a minority. It cannot be generally stated that the Christians are minorities throughout the length and breadth of the country and that the petitioner should be permitted to admit the students from across the country.

19. The analogy would be if the petitioner admits students from across the country giving preference to Christian students as long as they fulfill the minimum eligibility criteria fixed by the MCI, it would take away the rights of the better qualified students from general quota, whereas, when the petitioner institution is permitted only to those minority students within the Union Territory of Puducherry and the balance seats have to be given back to the All- India quota, whereupon, the meritorious students from all categories can be considered.

20. When the Hon’ble Supreme Court specifically stated that it should not spill out to other states, the notification of the first respondent cannot be said to be violative of any law or it is illegal.

8. As far as the Writ Petitioner is concerned, it is a linguistic minority, intending to serve Telugu speaking candidates. The prayer in the Writ Petition w