New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that domicile-based reservations in postgraduate (PG) medical courses are not permissible, and declared it “unconstitutional” for violating Article 14 of the Constitution.
The judgment was pronounced by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia and SVN Bhatti. The apex court said, “Residence-based reservation in PG medical courses is clearly violative of Article 14 of the Constitution…”.
The apex court said that the state-imposed domicile requirements for admission to PG medical courses run contrary to the constitutional guarantee of equality. The apex court stressed that Article 19 grants every citizen the right to reside, trade, and pursue a profession anywhere across the country.
The apex court’s judgment has made it clear that postgraduate medical admissions under state quotas must be determined only on the basis of merit in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET).
The bench said, “We are all domiciles in the territory of India. There is nothing like a provincial or state domicile. There is only one domicile. We are all residents of India”.
The apex court said that any form of domicile-based restriction at the postgraduate level disturbs the foundational principle of the Constitution, which grants the right to seek admission to educational institutions across the country.
The apex court observed that some degree of domicile-based reservation may be permissible in undergraduate (MBBS) admissions. However, the apex court made it clear that reservation cannot be extended to postgraduate courses, where specialisation and expertise are very important, and it would be unconstitutional to extend reservation to PG courses. The detailed judgment in the case will be uploaded later in the day.
The apex court said this verdict will not affect the domicile reservation already granted. “Students who are undergoing PG courses and those who have already passed out from such residence category will not be affected,” said the apex court.
"We are all domiciled in the territory of India. We are all residents of India. Our common bond as citizens and residents of one country gives us the right not only to choose our residence anywhere in India but also gives us the right to carry on trade & business or a profession anywhere in India. It also gives us the right to seek admission in educational institutions across India," said the bench, in its 32-page verdict.
"If such a reservation is permitted then it would be an invasion on the fundamental rights of several students, who are being treated unequally simply for the reasons that they belong to a different State in the Union. This would be a violation of the equality clause in Article 14 of the Constitution and would amount to a denial of equality before the law," said Justice Dhulia, who authored the judgment on behalf of the bench.
The top court said having made the above determination that residence-based reservation is impermissible in PG medical courses, the state quota seats, apart from a reasonable number of institution-based reservations, have to be filled strictly on the basis of merit in the All-India examination.
The bench said it is now necessary to refer to the detail reasoning given in Pradeep Jain (1984 ruling) as to why residence-based reservation in PG Medical courses is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, though to maintain a balance and for consideration of local needs such reservation may be permissible in MBBS courses.
"The reasoning given was that it is the State which spends money on creating the infrastructures and bears the expenses for running a medical college, and therefore some reservation at the basic level of a medical course i.e. MBBS can be permissible for the residents of that State," said the bench.
The bench said classification between residents and others here can be justified as the classification seeks to maintain a balance as it considers local needs, backwardness of the area, the expense borne by the State in creating the infrastructure, etc.
The top court delivered the verdict on a clutch of petitions, which arose from the appeals over admission to PG medical courses at the Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh.
A two-judge bench of the apex court, in 2019, heard the appeals against an order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which struck down domicile reservations in PG medical admissions as unconstitutional. The apex court had referred the matter to a larger bench for an authoritative adjudication of the matter.
Read More
Submit Data On Number Of FIRs Against Muslim Men In Triple Talaq Cases: SC To Centre
