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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56045

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V.G.ARUN, J
SRISWAGATH S, SAABIQ MOHAMED, MUSHALINI G – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 45037 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.O.A.NURIYA, SHRI.RAFEEK.V.K., SRI.SHAHIM BIN AZIZ, SHRI.MOHAMMED SHAFI.K., SMT.LYDIA ELIZABETH KOVOOR, SMT.NISHNA P.T., SMT.MUFEEDHA P., SHRI.ABDUL RAHOOF P.M., SHRI.MUHAMMED SHAFI K., SMT.FARSANA A.S.
For the Respondents: GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI.M.S.KIRAN, SC, NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR INDIAN SYSTEM OF MEDICINE (NCISM), SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR, SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA, SRI.P.G.PRAMOD, SENIOR G.P.

Eligibility for AIQ seats is dictated by state regulations, overriding national guidelines for OBCs who are not granted percentile relaxation based on domicile.

Headnote:(A) The National Commission for Indian System of Medicine - Directives on admissions - Ext.P7 guidelines concerning relaxation of percentile marks for OBC candidates in admissions to undergraduate courses under the All India Quota - Requirements for eligibility based on domicile - Classification of socially and educationally backward classes under Article 342A of the Constitution. (Paras 2, 11, 8)

(B) Council’s directives versus State Prospectus - The process of admission governed by the Prospectus of the State Government dictates that candidates from the Non-Keralite II category do not qualify for communal reservation and consequently do not benefit from reduced scoring percentiles - Review of merit seat allocation and legality of procedures adopted by the authorities (Paras 9, 11).

Facts of the case:
The petitioners seek admission to a Bachelor of Sidha Medicine and Surgery course at Santhigiri Sidha Medical College under AIQ, invoking claims for percentile relaxation as stipulated in national guidelines which were denied based on domicile status and prevailing State regulations.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the CEE’s authority to conduct admissions per their Prospectus, validating that the petitioners are not entitled to percentile reductions as OBC candidates under Central List provisions.

Issues: The key issues centered around eligibility concerning domicile classifications, potential reservation benefits for NK-II category students, and legality of the admissions process executed by the CEE.

Ratio Decidendi: The court adjudged that State regulations govern admission counselling processes and determined that petitioners cannot invoke federal guidelines selectively post-participation in state-administered admission processes.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. eligibility claims based on domicile and obc classification. (Para 1)
2. legal process of admissions and limitations. (Para 2 , 8)
3. state versus national guidelines on admissions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
4. counseling authority adherence to state regulations. (Para 6 , 10)
5. dismissal upheld on procedural grounds. (Para 7)

JUDGMENT

The petitioners, who belong to the Non-Keralite II Category (NK-II), qualified the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET Exam) of the year 2025-26 and applied for admissions for the Bachelor of Sidha Medicine and Surgery (BSMS) Course under the All India Quota (AIQ) and Management quota. The petitioners aspire for admission to the BSMS course in the Santhigiri Sidha Medical College at Thiruvananthapuram/ 5, Dated this the 11th day of December, 2025 respondent, the only self financing professional college in the State having BSMS course. As the petitioners belong to the Other Backward Classes ('OBC' for short) in the Central List, they expected relaxation in the minimum percentile of marks for allotment in the 15% AIQ seats, as stipulated in Ext.P7 guidelines published by the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (NCISM). The Commissioner of Entrance Examinations (CEE)/ 1st respondent has refused to consider the petitioners' claim for allotment in the AIQ by relaxing the percentile on the premise that the relaxation will not be available to the OBCs in the Central List, as allotment to the 15% Non-Keralite II category seats is being made by the State.

Hence, this writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs;

“I) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or directions to the 1st respondent to allot the petitioners under AIQ or Management Quota, without any discrimination based on domicile status;

II) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or directions directing the 1st respondent to allow NK-II category students to apply for BSMS admissions through the KEAM portal in accordance with the provisions of the KEAM Prospectus and the NCISM guidelines;

III) Declare that petitioners are eligible for admissions under AIQ quota by availing category based reservation as provided under the NCISM guidelines.

IV) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or directions to the 1st respondent to not to allot students once admitted under the State Merit Quota to All India Merit for filling up the All India Merit Vacant seats. “

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that, going by Ext.P7 guidelines, candidates are eligible for admission to the AIQ seats irrespective of their domicile. Hence, Central Reservation Policy is to be applied by granting category wise relaxation in qualifying criteria. As per the NCISM guidelines, the minimum marks in the case of SC, ST and OBC candidates is 40th percentile. The petitioners have secured 128 (45.3 Percentage), 114 (40.59 Percentage) and 142 (49.6 Percentage) marks respectively and thus have the requisite eligibility for allotment and admission. It is then contended that contrary to the stipulation in the Directives that the State authorities should conduct three rounds of counselling for admission in the 15% of AIQ seats and only thereafter convert the vacancies, if any remaining, to the State Quota Seats, the CEE illegally filled up three AIQ seats with State merit students.

3. Learned Government Pleader submitted that as per Exhibit P7 guidelines itself, the State Counselling Authority is authorised to conduct the counselling for admission in the 15% AIQ seats in private colleges/ institutions in the State. The State Authority, namely the CEE can conduct counselling only in accordance with the Prospectus published by the State Government. As per the KEAM Prospectus 2025, admission to 15% of AIQ seats are to be conducted without any domicile restrictions. The candidates who fall under NK-II category are also entitled to seek admission to the AIQ seats along with other can

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