Candidates belonging to the Other Backward Classes-Creamy Layer (OBC-CL) category are treated as general category candidates for the purpose of determining eligibility and qualifying cut-off marks for admissions.

Order

1. The instant writ petition has been filed assailing the non-inclusion of the petitioner in the provisional state merit list of round 1 of PG Medical candidates issued by NEET PG Admission/Counseling Board-2025, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, regarding State Medical PG Seats Allotments, 2025.

2. The primary argument of Mr. Mahendra S. Saharan, learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per the merit list published by respondent No.3 – NEET P.G. Admission Counselling Board-2025 on 22.11.2025, the name of the petitioner finds place at S.No. 3804 as he has secured 240 marks and was shown under OBC-CL (Other Backward Classes – Creamy Layer) category, however, for reasons best known to the respondents, the said merit list was withdrawn by the respondent No.3 and a revised merit list was issued on 23.11.2025 wherein, name of the petitioner was excluded. Learned counsel submits that the cut-off score for qualification under SC/ST/OBC category is 235 marks whereas, the petitioner has scored 240 marks and thus, there was no occasion for his name to be excluded from the revised merit list published on 23.11.2025.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the category of OBC cannot be bifurcated into OBC-CL (Other Backward Classes – Creamy Layer) and OBC-NCL (Other Backward Classes – Non-Creamy Layer) and once it is not disputed that the petitioner falls under the category of OBC, may be OBC-CL, all the benefits which are available to the candidates of OBC category have to be given to the petitioner.

4. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner handed over certain documents across the dais to substantiate his submissions that the respondents in a discriminatory manner has granted benefit of OBC category to certain other candidates falling under the category of OBC-CL and thus, it is not open for the respondents to deny benefit to the petitioner solely on the ground that petitioner’s category of ‘OBC-CL’ has to be considered as ‘general’ category.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents being State instrumentality cannot be permitted to discriminate amongst candidates. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that SC/ST/OBC-NCL candidates of other states, though, have been shown as ‘general’ in the provisionally considered category, have been considered on the basis of cut-off marks of SC/ST/OBC category, and consequently it was prayed that the writ petition be allowed and the petitioner’s name be included in the merit list thereby, enabling him to participate in the counselling.

6. E-converso, Mr. Yash Joshi, learned AAAG and Mr. Praduman Singh Rathore, Advocate, appearing for the respondents fervently submitted that a bare perusal of the writ petition reveals that the petitioner has relied upon the cut-off marks of ‘OBC’ category, whereas, in view of the fact that the petitioner undisputedly belongs to ‘OBC-CL’ category, the cut-off marks of ‘general’ category would be applicable upon him. Accordingly, it was submitted that as the cut-off marks of ‘general’ category was 276, and cut-off marks of SC/ST/OBC category was 235, the name of the petitioner was wrongly included in the first merit list published on 22.11.2025 and it was rightly revised on the very next day and consequently, the name of the petitioner was excluded therefrom.

7. Learned counsel for the respon