Merit is Sacrosanct: Rajasthan High Court Strikes Down 'One-Time Choice' Rule in Senior Residency Counselling for Doctors - 2025-09-04

Legal Articles | Court & Judgment Updates

Rajasthan High Court Champions Merit, Strikes Down Restrictive Counselling Rule for Senior Resident Doctors

JAIPUR: In a significant ruling championing the principle of merit in medical appointments, the Rajasthan High Court has struck down a contentious clause in the state's Senior Residency counselling policy that barred doctors from participating in subsequent rounds after accepting a seat. Justice Sameer Jain, presiding over a batch of petitions led by Dr. Srinivas R G, declared the stipulation "arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution."

The court directed the state to permit all eligible doctors from the NEET-PG 2021 batch to participate in further counselling rounds for vacant seats, ensuring that merit remains the sole criterion for allocation.

---

Background of the Dispute

The case involved dozens of doctors from the 2021 postgraduate batch who had completed their courses and were eligible for a mandatory two-year Senior Residency as per their service bonds. The dispute arose from the counselling notification dated April 1, 2025, which introduced a rule that once a doctor accepted an allotted seat, they were permanently excluded from any further counselling rounds, even if more desirable seats became vacant later.

The petitioners argued that this rule turned them into "birds in a cage," trapped in their initial placement while a substantial number of seats—estimated between 50% to 59%—later fell vacant as many doctors left to join premier institutions like AIIMS or opted to pay out their bonds.

Arguments Before the Court

Petitioners' Stance: The doctors, represented by Ms. Purvi Mathur and others, contended that the state had arbitrarily altered the "rules of the game" midway. They argued that the policy compromised merit, as less meritorious candidates could secure better placements in later stages. They also challenged the creation of a "Principal's pool" for leftover seats, alleging it was being used for non-transparent allotments based on extraneous factors like spouse postings or medical grounds, rather than merit.

State's Defence: The State of Rajasthan, represented by AAG Mr. B. S. Chhaba, defended the policy as a necessary measure for public interest. They argued that the rule was designed to ensure the timely and systematic absorption of the entire 2021 batch and to prevent an unending cycle of counselling. The government maintained that the policy was a conscious decision aimed at predictability and that courts should not interfere in executive policy matters.

Court's Reasoning and Expert Opinion

Justice Sameer Jain's judgment dismantled the state's arguments, placing firm reliance on judicial precedent and the opinion of an expert medical committee. The court had constituted a committee of senior doctors, which unequivocally recommended:

"The committee is of the opinion that opportunity should be given to those SR candidates of Batch 2021 who have been allotted seat... to participate in counseling of vacant post... transfer of candidates from one medical college to another medical college on any ground should not be allowed to keep the merit as sole mode of selection."

The court found this recommendation compelling, noting that the policy, as it stood, was unsustainable in law. Citing landmark Supreme Court judgments, including Kevin Joy & Ors. v. The Government of India & Ors. , the court reiterated a settled legal principle:

"...medical seats are a national asset and that the counselling process must be regulated with the highest degree of fairness and transparency, with merit being the sole determinative criterion."

The judgment emphasized that excellence in the medical profession is a constitutional necessity and that diluting merit for any reason has a detrimental effect on public healthcare.

Final Verdict and Directions

The High Court allowed the petitions and issued clear directives to the state government:

1. Participation in Further Rounds: All candidates of the NEET-PG 2021 batch must be permitted to participate in subsequent counselling rounds for Senior Residency based strictly on their merit.
2. Priority for 2021 Batch: The existing vacancies must first be filled by allocating them to the 2021 batch candidates.
3. Merit as the Sole Criterion: Seats can be offered to other batches only after the 2021 batch is accommodated, and even then, selection must be solely on merit.
4. Prohibition of Extraneous Factors: Allotments based on criteria like spouse posting, medical grounds, or any consideration other than merit are expressly prohibited.

The ruling provides immediate relief to numerous meritorious doctors and sets a strong precedent for ensuring fairness and transparency in medical appointments across the state.