Back
2018 Supreme(P&H) 3299
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Mahesh Grover, Mahabir Singh Sindhu, JJ.
Ashu Hooda - Appellant
Versus
Union Territory Chandigarh - Respondent
CWP Nos. 18240, 17407, 19851, 21558 and 21742 of 2018 (O&M)
Decided On : 31-08-2018
Girish Agnihotri, Sr. Advocate with Vijay Pal and Ishaan Bhardwaj, Advocates, for the Petitioners in CWP Nos. 18240, 19851 & 17407 of 2018.; Vijay Pal, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CWP no. 21742 of 2018.; Gurminder Singh, Sr. Advocate with R.P.S. Bara, Advocate, for the Petitioner in CWP no. 21558 of 2018.; Suman Jain, Advocate, for the UT, Chandigarh; Ms. Vrinda Gupta for Prateek Mahajan, Advocates, for the Respondent No.1 and 2 in CWP No. 18240 of 2018.; Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate, for the CBSE in CWP No. 18240, 17407 & 19851 of 2018.; Rajiv Atma Ram, Sr. Advocate with Arjun Pratap Atma Ram Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate with Amandeep Singh, Sajjan Singh, Advocates, for the Respondent Nos. 17 &40 in CWP No.19851 of 2018; Raghav Goel, R.S.Bhatia, Advocates, for the Respondent No.9 in CWP No. 18240 of 2018; B.R.Gupta, Advocate, for the Respondent No.72 in CWP No. 19851 of 2018.; Sarthak Gupta, Advocate, for the Respondent No.19, 31, 57, 61 in CWP No.19851 of 2018.; Ashish Bansal, Advocate, for the Respondent No.46 in CWP No. 18240 of 2018.; Arvinder Arora, Gurinder Singh, Vikas Chatrath, Advocates, for the Respondent No.66 in CWP No. 18240 of 2018.; Dinesh Chaudhary, Advocate, for the Respondent No.41 in CWP No. 19851 of 2018.; Saurabh Arora, Advocate Legal Aid Counsel, for the Respondent No.32 in CWP No. 18240 and 19851 of 2018.; Ankit Chahal, Advocate, for the Respondent No.58 in CWP No. 19851 of 2018.; R.P. Dangi, R.P.S. Ahluwalia, Rohit Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent in CWP no. 18240 & 19851 of 2018.; Sunil Garg, Advocate, for the Respondent No.13 in CWP No. 18240 & 19851 of 2018.; Chanderhas Yadav, Advocate, for the Respondent No.33 in CWP No. 19851 of 2018.; Vaneet Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent No.10 in CWP No. 19851 of 2018.; Vineet Dhanda, Advocate, for the Respondent No.71 in CWP No. 19851 of 2018.; H.S.Bhatia, Advocate, for the Respondent
The court emphasized the importance of residence preference in the admission process and ruled that candidates claiming residence preference in one state should be debarred from claiming seats in any other state or UT, Chandigarh.
Headnote:
NEET - Admission Process - National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (UG) - 15% All India Quota Seats - State Quota Seats - Reservation Policies - Eligibility Criteria - Residence Preference - Admission Procedure - Seat Allocation - Centralized Admission Process
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a challenge to the admission process for MBBS seats in Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh. The petitioners contested the eligibility criteria for admission, specifically the residence preference condition, arguing that it was arbitrary and discriminatory.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the residence preference condition to be arbitrary but refrained from issuing a mandate for the current academic session. It held that candidates claiming residence preference in one state should be debarred from claiming seats in any other state or UT, Chandigarh. The court directed the UT, Chandigarh to consider incorporating the residence preference for the next academic session.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the residence preference condition for admission to MBBS seats in Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the residence preference condition was arbitrary, it could not enforce a mandate for the current academic session. It also ruled that candidates claiming residence preference in one state should be debarred from claiming seats in any other state or UT, Chandigarh.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were disposed of with the court refraining from issuing a mandate for the current academic session and directing the UT, Chandigarh to consider incorporating the residence preference for the next academic session.
JUDGMENT
Mahesh Grover, J. - By this order we will dispose of five writ petitions bearing CWP nos. 18240, 17407, 19851, 21558 and 21742 of 2018 since they involve commonality of issues that are germane to the admission process qua MBBS seats in Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh(hereinafter referred to as 'Medical College, Chandigarh'). The issues raised in the petition have an uncanny propensity to emerge each year during the admission season. Since the time in which these complex issues are to be decided is compressed to a schedule prescribed, providing no deviation it often stretches the Courts to the maximum.
2. All the petitioners as also the respondents have qualified the Central Common Examination which goes by the nomenclature of National Eligibility Entrance Test (hereinafter referred to as the 'NEET'). All of them have applied for the Medical College, Chandigarh with the private respondents succeeding in making the grade while the petitioners in list of deprived candidates.
3. Concededly the scheme of examination provides for All India seats and once those seats are exhausted on the basis of merit obtained by an individual in the said examination, the remaining seats revert to the State quota. All India examination is not in dispute but to understand the workability of the allocation of seats, it would be appropriate to refer to some of the provisions of the Information Bulletin of the NEET which gives an insight into the operational aspect:-
"The Central Board of Secondary Education will conduct the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test for admission to MBBS/BDS Courses in the session 2018-19 on 6th May, 2018 (Sunday).
The responsibility of CBSE is limited to the conduct of the entrance test, declaration of result and providing All India Rank to the Directorate General of health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India for counselling of 15% All India Quota Seats, Deemed Universities/Central Universities/Seats of ESIC & AFMC including BHU & AMU and providing the result to the State Counselling Authorities and Admitting Institutions.
The result of NEET (UG) may be utilized by other entities of Central/State Governments for admission purpose in accordance with their rules.
The Counselling for successful candidates under 15% All India Quota seats, Deemed Universities/Central Universities/Seats of ESIC & AFMC including BHU & AMU will be conducted by the MCC/GGHS. The counselling for admission in seats under the control of other States/Universities/Institutions shall be conducted as per the notifications issued separately by the authorities concerned.
During counselling, the eligibility criteria, self-declaration, various documents, etc. of the eligible candidates shall be verified as per norms specified by the respective authorities and Medical/Dental Colleges.
Admissions to all seats of MBBS/BDS will be done through NATIONAL ELIGIBILITY CUM ENTRANCE TEST (UG)- 2018. There are following quota seats available:-
i. All India Quota Seats
ii. State Government Quota Seats
iii. Central Institutions/Universities/Deemed Universities
iv. State/Management/NRI Quota Seats in Private Medical/Dental Colleges or any Private University v. Central Pool Quota Seats ."
The eligibility for 15% All India quota seats is as below:-
"3. ELIGIBILITY FOR 15% ALL INDIA QUOTA SEATS
(a) Indian Nationals, Non Resident Indians (NRIs), Oversees Citizen of India (OCIs), Persons with Indian Origin (PIOs) & Foreign Nationals are eligible for 15% All India Quota Seats.
(b) Candidates from State of J & K
(i) Students from State of J & K are NOT ELIGIBLE for 15% all India quota seats as State of J&K has opted out of All India Scheme since its inception. If they claim eligibility, they must submit online Self Declaration which will be generated and printed automatically alongwith confirmation page
