IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
Rohit Arya, Avanindra Kumar Singh, JJ.
Ramnaresh @ Rinku Kushwah, S/O Ramdayal Kushwah And ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Its Principal Secretary and ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 23060 of 2023
Decided On : 12-01-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seek relief on seat allocation violations. (Para 1 , 5) |
| 2. detailed examination of reservation rules. (Para 2) |
| 3. arguments regarding candidate inclusion in categories. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. clarification of reservation principles by supreme court. (Para 6 , 7) |
ORDER :
Rohit Arya, J.
This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners, who were candidates in NEET (UG) 2023 Examination held on 07/05/2023 seeking the following reliefs:
ii- That, respondent department may kindly be directed to allot the MBBS seat of Unreserved Category Government School Quota to the meritorious Reserved Category Government School Quota candidate;
iii- That, respondent department may kindly be directed to commence fresh counselling from Round 1 in regard to Government School Quota for Unreserved and Reserved candidate;
iv- That, it may be declared that action/inaction of respondent department of not allotting the MBBS Unreserved Category Government School Quota seats to the meritorious Reserved Category Government School Quota candidate is in violation to the dictum of Saurav Yadav & Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors ((2021)4 SCC 542)
Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted”
Results were declared on 13/06/2023. After completion of counseling successful candidates were allocated seats in respective colleges. No seats are vacant. The aforesaid facts are recorded in the order passed by this Court on 08/11/2023.
In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, the writ petition is taken up for decision. It is pertinent to mention that petitioners respectively belong to OBC, SC, OBC, SC and EWS categories.
2. Before adverting to the merits of rival contentions, it would be expedient to extract the rule position governing the point in issue. Department of Technical Education Skill and Training has framed M.P.Chikitsa Shiksha Pravesh Niyam, 2018 which inter alia provide as under :-
Rule 1 laf{kIr uke vkSj izkjEHk-&
¼1½ bu fu;eksa dk laf{kIr uke e/;izns'k fpfdRlk f'k{kk izos'k fu;e] 2018 gSA
¼2½ ;s fu;e e/;izns'k jkti= esa buds izdkf'kr gksus ds fnukad ls izo`Rr gksaxsA
Rule 2 ¼B½ defines as under:-
¼B½ ^izoxZ* ls vfHkizsr gS] efgyk] Lora=rk laxzke lSukuh] lSfud fnO;kax ,oa vfuoklh Hkkjrh; izoxZ(
Rule 2 ¼i½ defines for ^Js.kh* as under:-
¼i½ ^Js.kh* ls vfHkizsr gS] vuqlwfpr tkfr] vuqlwfpr tutkfr] vU; fiNM+k oxZ ,oa vukjf{kr Js.kh A
Rule 4 provides for reservation. Rule 4 (1) provides for reservation Js.kho) and Rule 4 (2) defines reservation izoxZokj.
4- vkj{k.k &
¼1½ Js.khokj vkj{k.k &
¼d½ Js.khokj vkj{k.k vuqlwph&2 ds [k.M ^v^ vuqlkj gksxk A
¼[k½ jkT; 'kklu ds fn'kk&funsZ'kksa ds rgr dzhehys;j dh ifjf/k esa vkus okys vU; fiNMk oxZ Js.kh ds vH;FkhZ dks vkj{k.k dk ykHk ugha fn;k tk,xkA
¼x½ dkmaflfyax ds f}rh; pdz esa vkjf{kr Js.kh fo'ks"k dk vgZrk/kkjh iathd`r vH;FkhZ miyC/k ugha gksus dh n'kk esa izos'k gsrq vkoaVu fuEu dze ls fd;k tk,xk%&
¼1½ vuqlwfpr tutkfr dh fjfDr;ksa ds in ds fo:) vuqlwfpr tkfr ds vH;fFkZ;ksa dks(
¼2½ vuqlwfpr tkfr dh fjfDr;ksa ds fo:) vuqlwfpr tutkfr ds vH;fFkZ;ksa dks(
¼3½ vuqlwfpr tutkfr ,oa vuqlwfpr tkfr ds fjfDr;ksa ds fo:) vU; fiNMk oxZ ds vH;fFkZ;ksa dks( ,oa
¼4½ mijksDr rhuksa Jsf.k;ksa ds vkjf{kr vH;FkhZ miyC/k ugha gksus dh n'kk esa] fjfDr;ksa ds fo:) vukjf{kr Js.kh ds vH;kfFkZ;ksa dks A
¼?k½ dkmaflfyax ds vafre pdz esa vkjf{kr Js.kh fo'ks"k dk vgZrk/kkjh iathd`r vH;FkhZ miyC/k ugha gksus dh n'kk esa] ,slh Js.kh dh fjfDr;ksa ds fo:) vukjf{kr Js.kh ds vH;fFkZ;ksa dks izos'k fn;k tk,xk A
[k.M&c izoxZokj vkj{k.k provides as under :-
| izoxZ | IkkB~;Øe ftlesa ykxw gS |
| |
Anil Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P. ((1995)5 SCC 173)
Saurav Yadav and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others
The court affirmed that within reservation policies, vacancies may transfer across categories based on merit, confirming the legality and adherence to established rules in the admission process.
Reservation – A candidate belonging to any of vertical reservation categories who on the basis of his own merit is entitled to be selected in open or general category, will be selected against genera....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the 'merit cum preference' principle for seat allotment, as well as the interpretation and application of Rule 17 of the Jammu a....
The allocation process for women in the reservation system must adhere strictly to the principles of merit and not exceed the constitutional quota limits.
The allocation of reserved seats must follow institutional policies ensuring compliance with relevant laws, without arbitrary conversion of categories.
The court upheld the admission process rules, stating that a student who submits a status retention form cannot later challenge subsequent admissions, ensuring fairness in the allocation of seats.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.