Office Notes, reports, S N L o . .

Date ord o e r r d s ir o e r c p ti r o o n c s e e a d n i d n gs COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS Registrar’s order with Signatures WPMS No.3429 of 2022 With WPMB No. 476 of 2025 (WPMS No.1080 of 2025) WPMB No.475 of 2025 (WPMS No.1064 of 2025)

WPMS No.91 of 2024 WPMS No.204 of 2023 WPMS No.34 of 2024 WPMS No.377 of 2023 WPMS No.193 of 2023 WPMS No.170 of 2023 WPMS No.205 of 2023 WPMS No.207 of 2023 WPMS No.368 of 2023 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Navneet Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India.

3. Mr. Devendra Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

4. Ms. Abhilasha Tomar, proxy counsel for Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

5. Mr. Gaurav Nayal proxy counsel for Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.4.

6. Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the intervener through Video Conferencing.

7. Since all these petitions raise identical issues concerning the dispute relating to admission to the B.A.M.S. course for academic sessions 2021-2022, 2022-2023, 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 and 2025-2026, they are being heard together.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the present writ petitions have been filed seeking a direction to respondent no. 2 to enroll the students admitted by the petitioners’ college and to permit such students to appear in their practical as well as semester examinations of the B.A.M.S.

course.

9. Learned counsel further submits that admission to the B.A.M.S. course was made subject to qualification in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) pursuant to the Central Government Notification/Regulation dated 07.12.2018, whereby NEET was prescribed as a mandatory eligibility criterion for admission to the said course. It is submitted that NEET was introduced for the first time for the academic session 2018–2019, which led to the filing of several writ petitions across the country challenging the imposition of NEET as an essential qualification for admission to the B.A.M.S. course. The controversy ultimately reached the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which, in Association of Managements of Homeopathic Medical Colleges of Maharashtra v. Union of India & Ors., (2019) 20 SCC 511, held that for the academic session 2018– 2019, qualification in NEET was not an essential requirement for admission to the B.A.M.S. course. Thereafter, in subsequent civil appeals, the Hon’ble Apex Court relaxed the condition of mandatory NEET qualification and permitted students, who were otherwise eligible, to continue their studies for the academic sessions 2019–2020 and 2020– 2021. It is submitted that while most such students have already completed the course, a few are still pursuing their studies.