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)(Raj) 10377

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
Anuroop Singhi, J
Saumya Mathur – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5275/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Purvi Mathur, Mr. Kushagra Sharma, Mr. Sharad Dadhich, Mr. Dilip Rathore, Mr. Raj Singh Rathore, Mr. Bheeshm Sharma
For the Respondents: Mr. Vigyan Shah, Ms. Tanvisha Pant, Mr. Archit Bohra, Mr. Praduman Singh Rathore

A state administrative circular introducing new onerous conditions, such as a bank guarantee for service bonds, cannot be applied retrospectively to candidates who have already commenced their admission or recruitment process under the field-prevailing earlier circulars.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 19 and 21 - Service Bond - Requirement of bank guarantee - Retrospective application of circular - Impugned circular dated 28.01.2026 issued by the State Government mandating bank guarantee for NEET-SS and INI-SS courses cannot be applied retrospectively to candidates whose admission process commenced prior to its issuance. (Para 11)

(B) Circular interpretation - Clause 16 of the circular dated 01.04.2025 permits the release/transfer of original documents for pursuing higher studies in Institutes of National Importance, subject to an undertaking to fulfill bond conditions thereafter. (Paras 5, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, medical professionals, filed a writ petition challenging the requirement of furnishing a bank guarantee as a pre-condition for pursuing Super-Speciality courses and Senior Residency appointments, imposed by a circular dated 28.01.2026. The petitioners contended that the relevant events leading to their eligibility occurred prior to this circular, and they should be governed by the terms of the earlier circular dated 01.04.2025.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that the petitioners are governed by the circular dated 01.04.2025 and directed the respondent-State to transmit the original documents of the petitioners directly to their respective allotted Super Speciality colleges, provided the petitioners furnish the requisite undertaking to serve the bond period.

Issues: Whether the circular dated 28.01.2026 imposing a bank guarantee requirement can be applied retrospectively to candidates whose qualification and admission process commenced before its date of issuance.

Ratio Decidendi: A circular cannot be applied retrospectively, particularly to the detriment of candidates who have participated in a recruitment or admission process on the basis of existing rules (the 'rules of the game' principle).

Result: Petition allowed with directions to release/transfer documents.

Table of Content
1. petitioners challenge retrospective application of a new circular post-commencement of their examination process. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. the court rules that circulars cannot be applied retrospectively if the recruitment process commenced earlier. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
3. mandatory transfer of documents between institutions with professional undertakings as a balanced solution. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)

Order

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers :-

“In these circumstances, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to accept this writ petition and pass appropriate directions and:

I. Quash or set aside the impugned order dated 28.01.2026 (F.7 (54) (393) (1)/SR Allotment/Dme/Acad/2025/-08146) issued by the Respondent no. 2 insofar as it applies retrospectively to the Petitioners or imposes additional financial and procedural obligations not envisaged at the time of their admission;

II. Issue a writ of Mandamus, Certiorari, order or direction declaring that the impugned order dated 28.01.2026 issued by Respondent no. 2, to the extent it imposes the requirement of furnishing a bank guarantee equivalent to the service bond amount as a pre-condition for admission to NEET-SS and INI-SS Courses, is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and without lawful authority;

III. Declare that the Petitioners are entitled to pursue Super-Speciality Courses, Fellowships, and Senior Residency appointments without being compelled to furnish a bank guarantee, and that their original documents shall not be withheld on account of any retrospective or belated condition;

IV. Direct the Respondents to release the original academics documents of the petitioners to pursue Super Speciality Courses, Fellowships, and Senior Residency appointments.

V. Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the Petitioners.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, have relied upon orders passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18011/2025 titled as Dr. Harshpreet Kour Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others dated 10.02.2026 and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.19839/2025 titled as Dr. Yash Vardhan Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others dated 16.02.2026.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that all the petitioners herein have cleared their NEET – Super Speciality Examination, 2025 (NEET – SS Exam), the result of which was declared on 23.01.2026 and all the crucial and relevant events have also taken place prior to the issuance of the circular dated 28.01.2026 by the State and thus, the petitioners be governed by the circular dated 01.04.2025 and not 28.01.2026.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that as per the Information Bulletin of NEET – SS Exam, the time period for submission of application form was from 05.11.2025 to 25.11.2025, in pursuance to which the petitioners submitted their respective application forms and thereafter the admit cards were also issued to the petitioners and finally, the examination was conducted on 26.12.2025 and 27.12.2025. Even the result of the NEET – SS Exam was declared on 23.01.2026 and thus, the petitioners cannot be governed by the circular dated 28.01.2026.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that Clause 16 of the circular dated 01.04.2025 reads as under:-

"16. lacaf/kr vH;fFkZ;ks a ds ewy nLrkost mijksä 02 o"kZ dh jktdh; lsok vof/k iw.kZ djus ds mijk ar lacaf/kr fpfdRlk egkfo|ky; }kjk fjfyt fd;s tk;s axsA bl gsrq muds }kjk iznku dh xbZ jktdh; lsok ds ckjs es a izek.k&i= lacaf/kr iz/kkukpk;Z ,oa fu; a=d }kjk tkjh fd;s tk;s axsA mijksä izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij 02 o"kZ dh jktdh; lsok dk lR;kiu fd;k tkdj lacaf/kr fpfdRlk egkfo|ky; }kjk muds ewy nLrkost vH;kFkhZ dks ykSVk fn;s tk;s axsA

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