OCI cardholders are ineligible to sponsor candidates under NRI quota if their OCI card was issued after the 2021 Government Notification restricting such sponsorship rights.

ORDER :

D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

A. The Writ Petition:

This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus directing the third respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the list of candidates eligible for admission to the Non-Resident Indian (in short “NRI”) quota in postgraduate degree/diploma courses in Self-Financing Medical Colleges in Tamil Nadu for the 2025-2026 session, pursuant to the prospectus dated 08.09.2025, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, and consequently, to permit the petitioner to participate in all the rounds of counselling to be held under the said prospectus, in accordance with law.

B. The Petitioner’s Case:

2. The petitioner's case is that, after completing his M.B.B.S. degree examinations, he applied for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-NEET PG-2025 for the academic year 2025-2026 and scored 291 out of 800 marks. Admission to PG courses is governed by the prospectus issued by the Selection Committee under the Directorate of Medical Education and Research, vide G.O.(D) No.1007, Health and Family Welfare (MCA1) Department, dated 08.09.2025, as amended from time to time.

2.1 The petitioner’s maternal uncle, Mr. Rakesh Ram, S/o Krishnamoorthy, who is now a citizen of the United States of America and an Overseas Citizen of India cardholder, offered to sponsor the petitioner’s higher education under the NRI quota. The Tahsildar, Egmore Taluk, also issued a relationship certificate dated 15.09.2025, confirming that the person is the petitioner’s maternal uncle. Accordingly, the petitioner duly applied for the postgraduate courses under the NRI quota, vide Application No. 25PG201227. The petitioner also duly uploaded the Overseas Citizen of India card, the NRI/OCI sponsorship certificate, the relationship certificate, a copy of the sponsor’s passport, and a copy of the bank statement of the maternal uncle, Mr Rakesh Ram, held at Huntington National Bank, Columbus.

2.2 However, upon scrutiny, when the respondent published the list of ineligible candidates on 23/10/2025, the petitioner’s name was also mentioned in Sl. No. 59. The petitioner submitted an email representation to the respondents regarding grievance redressal on 23.10.2025. However, the Addendum to the provisional list released on 18.11.2025 again reflected the petitioner’s candidature in the rejected list and did not contain any reason whatsoever. Upon perusal of the select list, even candidates with lower marks have been allotted PG seats under the NRI quota; therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

C. The Respondent’s Case :

3. The writ petition is resisted by the respondents by filing a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that under the NRI quota, as per the prospectus, Indian citizens must be sponsored by a Non-Resident Indian or by a sponsor holding an OCI card that was issued before the Notification of the Government of India on 04.03.2021. Since the sponsor of the petitioner was issued the OCI card only on 22.03.2021, after the Notification, the sponsor’s rights are governed by the Gazette Notification dated 04.03.2021. As per the same, an OCI cardholder has no right to sponsor a relative/ward on par with the NRI. Therefore, in the absence of the right, as per the relevant statute/rules read with the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Anushka Rengunthawar and others v. Union of India and others (W.P.(C)No.891 of 2021 dated 03.02.2023), the petitioner’s candidature could not be considered under the NRI quota and, as such was rejected.

D. The Arguments:

4. Mr. Richardson Wilson, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that, first, the very genesis of the NRI quota was the judgment of P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra , reported in [ (2005) 6 SCC 537 ], wherein, while considering the right of the private institution to thrive, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India made an exception to merit, thereby allowing the institution to charge higher fees from these r