Back
NBEMS Wins as Says Can't Be After Counselling
In a decisive ruling that balances reservation policy with admission fairness, the has held that reserved postgraduate medical seats cannot be and thrown open to general category candidates after the has commenced, even when no eligible reserved category candidate is found.
Justice Dinesh Mehta, hearing a reference from a by a , allowed an by the and dismissed a filed by Dr. Aditi Panwar. The had earlier directed NBEMS to convert an OBC seat in Radio-diagnosis at into an unreserved seat and offer it to candidates including the petitioner.
A That Backfired
Dr. Aditi Panwar, a general category candidate, secured rank 142 in the DNB Post Diploma Centralized Entrance Test (PDCET) . The published revealed one seat in Radio-diagnosis at the Panchkula hospital reserved for OBC candidates. No OBC candidate qualified in that branch, and the seat had reportedly remained vacant for several years.
Despite knowing the seat was not meant for her category, Dr. Panwar listed the hospital as her first preference during counselling, hoping that NBEMS would eventually de-reserve it. She was instead allotted a seat at . When her subsequent representation for the Panchkula seat failed, she moved the High Court seeking a direction to de-reserve the OBC seat in her favour.
The allowed her petition, prompting NBEMS to . The delivered a —one judge concurring with the 's view (with modifications) and the other dissenting—leading to the reference before Justice Mehta.
NBEMS: Handbook and Committee Decision Bar De-Reservation
NBEMS argued that Clause 4.6 of the counselling handbook expressly prohibited conversion of vacant reserved category seats into other categories during the . It also placed reliance on the minutes of the 15th meeting dated , which provided that vacant DNB (Post Diploma) seats would be transferred to the three-year DNB (Post MBBS) pool, ensuring they would not remain unused.
Dr. Panwar’s counsel countered that the decision was an internal affair never published in the handbook. He argued that compelling a postgraduate medical seat to remain vacant was a waste of national resources, and cited the judgment in in support.
Fairness Over Expediency: Court’s Reasoning
Rejecting the petitioner’s arguments, Justice Mehta held that a general category candidate simply cannot claim a seat earmarked for a reserved category merely because it remains vacant.
“When a seat is reserved for a particular category, a candidate from general category cannot stake his/her claim against such seat,” the court observed.
The court also dismissed the assumption that the seat would go to waste, noting the ’s decision to transfer it to the post-MBBS pool. On the contrary, de-reserving the seat after candidates had already exercised their options based on the published would cause significant .
“The respondents cannot be directed to do an act which is likely to give or bring ,” the judgment stated.
The court pointed out that many more meritorious candidates might have opted for other colleges because the Panchkula seat was reserved. To de-reserve it now would only benefit the petitioner, who took a by opting for an ineligible seat.
Additionally, more than a year had elapsed since the admission session. Directing admission at such a belated stage would disrupt training schedules, attendance requirements, and the admissions process for the subsequent session.
A Forward-Looking Directive
While allowing NBEMS’s and dismissing Dr. Panwar’s petition, Justice Mehta issued a crucial direction for the future. He held that it cannot be an absolute rule that courts can never direct de-reservation of unfilled reserved seats. However, once the is published and candidates have filled in their options, no such direction can be given.
The court ordered NBEMS to put in place a mechanism whereby, if before counselling it becomes clear that no reserved category candidate is available in a particular branch, the board shall obtain the requisite approval from the concerned state government to de-reserve the seat and publish a revised in advance.
“But once, the has been declared and candidates have filled in their options, no direction can be given by the Court to de-reserve the seat(s),” the judgment clarified.
Key Observations
- “When a seat is reserved for a particular category, a candidate from general category cannot stake his/her claim against such seat.”
- “The respondents cannot be directed to do an act which is likely to give or bring .”
- “This Court is almost certain that apart from the respondent no.1/writ petitioner, there would be hardly any candidate of general category who had filled an option for respondent no.3/hospital…”
- “It is, therefore, ordered that the appellant-NBEMS shall henceforth take care that in case a candidate of any reserved category… is not declared successful… then, such number(s) of seat shall be got after taking requisite approval from the concerned State and the same shall be filled by open category candidate.”
- “But once, the has been declared and candidates have filled in their options, no direction can be given by the Court to de-reserve the seat(s).”
The ruling reinforces the integrity of the while encouraging proactive administrative steps to prevent valuable seats from lying vacant.
