The court confirmed that residence-based reservations in Post Graduate Medical Courses are impermissible, upholding equity for students already enrolled and dismissing the petition as unjustified.

JUDGMENT :

MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J.

Present petition has been filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution for issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside Public Notice dated 03.06.2025 (P-13), whereby State Quota Seats which fell vacant owing to the quashing of the reservation of seats for Union Territory Pool (for short ‘U.T. Pool’) have been put in the All India Quota (for short ‘A.I.Q.’), resulting into excess of 50%limit prescribed for this purpose.

2. Paper-book reveals that on 08.11.2024, respondent No.2- Government Medical College & Hospital, Sector-32, Chandigarh (for short ‘GMCH’) invited applications for admission to MD/MS Course for the “Session 2024”. As per the prospectus, there were 155 seats for Post Graduate (PG) Course; which were divided into “A.I.Q.” and “State Quota” to the extent of 75 seats and 80 seats [including 04 Economically Weaker Section (for short ‘EWS’)], respectively.

2.1 Out of 80 seats earmarked for State Quota, 40 were reserved under the category of I.P. Pool and remaining 40 were earmarked for U.T. Pool.

2.2 It is an admitted position that petitioner Nos.3, 4 & 5 have neither completed their MBBS; nor appeared and/or qualified National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (Post Graduate) Examination-2024 (for short ‘NEET PG’). Thus as on today, none of these three petitioners i.e. 3, 4 & 5 are having any cause of action; hence, at the outset, it is observed that petition qua them is wholly misconceived.

2.3 So far as petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 are concerned, they secured 49369 and 17865 rank, respectively in NEET PG.

2.4 In November-2024, respondent No. 2 issued merit list of candidates in I.P. Pool, where petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 were shown at Sr.Nos. 68 & 42, respectively.

2.5 It transpires that due to pendency of litigation before Hon’ble the Supreme Court, third round of counselling was not conducted; but now respondent No.2 has issued the impugned Public Notice dated 03.06.2025 (P-13) claiming to be in terms of decision of Hon’ble the Supreme Court dated 29.01.2025 (P-7) passed in Civil Appeal No. 9289 of 2019 titled as “ Dr. Tanvi Behl Versus Shrey Goel and others ”; Order dated 24.03.2025 (P-9) passed in Misc. Application No. 512 of 2025 in C.A. No. 9289 of 2019 & order dated 27.05.2025 (P-12) in CWP-9749-2025 titled as “Shubhamdeep Singh Kang Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and another”; hence present petition.

CONTENTIONS:-

3. Learned Senior counsel contends that although, residence based reservation was held to be totally impermissible in the PG Medical Course by Hon’ble the Supreme Court vide judgment dated 29.01.2025 passed in Shrey Goel’s case (supra); but it was further held that it will not affect reservation already granted to students who are undergoing the PG Course(s); or have already passed their PG Course(s) from respondent No.2.

3.1. Again contends that on 25.02.2025, in view of Shrey Goel’s case (supra), third round of counselling was not held and misc. application moved by respondent No. 2 on 24.02.2025 for seeking permission to conduct third/further round(s) of counselling was declined by Hon’ble the Supreme Court on 24.03.2025 (P-9).

3.2. Also contends that in compliance of Shrey Goel’s case (ibid), a Public Notice dated 09.04.2025 (P-10) was issued by respondent No.2, wherein it was decided that all the vacant seats of U.T. Pool State Quota will be converted and filled through I.P. Pool of State Quota on the basis of rank obtained in NEET PG.

3.3. Yet again contends that in Shubhamdeep Singh Kang’s case (supra), respondent No. 3-Secretary, Department of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh filed additional affidavit dated 29.04.2024 (P-11) wherein they again reiterated the decision to fil