Supreme Court Rules Against Domicile-Based Reservations in PG Medical Courses

Background

In a landmark judgment delivered on January 29, 2025, the Supreme Court of India addressed the constitutionality of domicile or residence-based reservations in Post Graduate (PG) Medical Courses. The case involved Dr. Tanvi Behl as the appellant against Shrey Goel and others, concerning admissions to the only medical college in the Union Territory of Chandigarh, which had 64 PG seats reserved based on residency criteria.

Arguments

The petitioners challenged the reservation policy, arguing that it violated Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. They contended that the policy favored local residents and those who had studied in the same institution, thereby undermining merit-based admissions. The respondents defended the policy, asserting that it was necessary to address local needs and ensure that residents had access to educational opportunities in their home state.

Court's Analysis and Reasoning

The Supreme Court, led by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia , analyzed previous landmark judgments, including Jagadish Saran v. Union of India and Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India , which established that while institutional preferences could be permissible, residence-based reservations were not. The Court emphasized that merit must prevail in higher education, particularly in specialized fields like medicine, where the quality of education and expertise is paramount. The judgment highlighted that allowing such reservations would violate the fundamental right to equality and could lead to a fragmented educational system based on parochial loyalties.

Decision

The Supreme Court ruled that domicile or residence-based reservations in PG Medical Courses are constitutionally invalid. It upheld the High Court's decision to cancel the admissions made under the challenged provisions and directed that the remaining seats be filled strictly based on merit from the NEET examination. However, the Court clarified that this ruling would not affect students already admitted under the previous policy, ensuring equity for those currently enrolled.

This decision reinforces the commitment to meritocracy in medical education and sets a precedent for future admissions policies across India.