ORDER

1. The facts and circumstances involved in all these writ petitions being one and the same, at the request of learned counsel for the parties the matters are heard together.

2. IA Nos.12363 and 12385 of 2022 are applications filed seeking to vacate an interim order granted by this Court on 26.8.2022. In terms whereof the petitioners were permitted to participate in the counseling process as in-service candidates on the 30% reservations for in-service doctors.

3. Various grounds have been urged in support of the application seeking vacating stay. On considering the same, we are of the view that hearing the applications is as good as hearing the main writ petitions. Therefore, at request of learned counsels, the matters are taken up for final disposal. The facts as narrated in Writ Petition No. 16249 of 2022, are stated herein for the sake of convenience.

4.(a) The case of the petitioners is that they are all in-service doctors, who have been serving the State of Madhya Pradesh for many years. They appeared in the NEET- PG examination which was held on 22.5.2022 and have qualified for the same. The State had to prepare a list of Medical Officers who are eligible to get the advantage of 30% reservation for in-service candidates in terms of the Gazette notification dated 9th March 2018 as amended by the Gazette notification dated 5.10.2021. In terms whereof, Rule 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Chikitsa Shiksha Pravesh Niyam, 2018 (For short “Rules of 2018”) clarifies to the effect that in-service candidates which include demonstrators/tutors/medical officers are eligible for the reservation of 30% as in-service doctors. Since the petitioners were in-service doctors they were eligible for the same. However, the State brought about a provisional list vide Annexure- P/13 which contained the list of various doctors who are eligible as well as ineligible to obtain the 30% reservation. The petitioners’ name were found at serial No.95, 27 and 33 respectively. They were not a part of the successful list of candidates who were eligible to get 30% reservation for in-service candidates. Hence, the instant writ petition was filed seeking to quash the same so far as it relates to the petitioners and for a direction to the respondents to include their names in the list of medical officers eligible for 30% reservation.

(b) It is further contended that similar facts arose for consideration on an earlier occasion where the doctors were denied the benefit of 30% reservation. The same was challenged in Writ Petition No.25819 of 2021 (Dr. Vijendra Dhanware and another v. The State of M.P. and others). A Division Bench of this Court by the order dated 14.1.2022 considered the said contentions which are similar to the one that are raised herein and held that the State have erred in not treating the petitioners therein as in-service candidates and therefore directed that the petitioners be treated as in-service candidates for the Postgraduate Degree Course and to consider their claim for the same in accordance with law. Hence, it is pleaded that the similar relief be granted to the petitioners.

5.(a) The State have filed their reply. They have stated therein that none of the contentions of the petitioners are required to be accepted. That rule 14 of the Rules of 2018 has been amended and the amendment has come into force from the date of publication of Gazette on 26.7.2022 wherein rule 14 dealing with the in-service candidates has been amended to the extent of granting benefit of 30% quota on the degree seats in all Government and Private Medical/Dental Colleges to only those in-service candidates, who have served in rural/remote/difficult areas for a minimum period of three years. That so far as the petitioners are concerned, they have not rendered their services in the rural/remote/difficult areas and therefore, they are not entitled for 30% quota. That the said rules were amended in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tamil