SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 10200

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
AADITYA RAMCHANDANI – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WPC/1411/2026



##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:14956-DB Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date:

2026.04.02

11:14:24 +0530 NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPC No. 1411 of 2026

Aaditya Ramchandani S/o Manoj Ramchandani Aged About 26 Years R/o 352 Ward 4, Sindhi Colony, Korba, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Education, Shastri Bhawan New Delhi.

2 - The Secretary Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi.

3 - The Director General Directorate General Of Health Services (Dghs), Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, Government Of India, Room

Number 354, Nirman Bhawan, Delhi.

4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal

Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5 - Directorate Of Medical Education Through The Director, Directorate Of Medical Education, Dks Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

##PAGE2##

2

6 - National Medical Commission Through Its Secretary General, Pocket - 14, Sector 18, Dwarka Phase I, New Delhi 110077

7 - Late Bisahu Das Mahant Memorial Government Medical College Korba, Through Its Registrar, Jhagarha, Urga Road, District- Korba,

Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate For Respondent 1 & 2 : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Advocate

For Respondent/ State Mr. Shashank Thakur, A. A. G.

For Respondent No. 6. Mr. R. S. Marhas, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

01/04/2026

1. Heard Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned counsel for Respondent No. 1 and 2, Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Addl. Advocate General, appearing for the Respondent/State as well as Mr. R. S.

Marhas, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 6.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the

petitioner seeks for the following relief(s):

“(10.1) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ, order or directions directing

##PAGE3##

3

the respondents to allow the petitioner to be admitted against the vacant seat of MD General

Medicine at Government Medical College, Korba.

(10.2) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and

circumstances of the case.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner is an EWS category medical graduate from IQ City Medical College, Durgapur, currently serving as a Junior Resident at Government Medical College, Korba, appeared in NEET PG 2025 and secured 343/800 marks with an All India Rank of 83,701 and EWS category rank of 8,062, thereby qualifying for All India 50% quota counselling. Despite participating in all rounds of counselling, including the stray vacancy round, the petitioner was not allotted any seat, while a candidate with a significantly lower rank (1,06,660) was allotted a DNB seat under the EWS category. The petitioner promptly raised objections via e-mail within the stipulated time and made repeated efforts to contact the authorities, but received no response. Subsequently, through an RTI application, it was revealed that a PG seat in MD General Medicine remained vacant at Government Medical College, Korba. Aggrieved by the arbitrary denial of admission despite merit and the availability of a vacant seat, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking allocation of the said

seat.

##PAGE4##

4

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that, the petitioner, being a meritorious candidate, has been arbitrarily and unjustly denied admission in the NEET PG counselling process, despite securing a higher rank than another candidate who was allotted a seat under the same EWS category. Such action of the respondent authorities is manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top