The Punjab and Haryana high court has imposed rupees 50K cost on a review petition seeking directions not to implement the reservation for economically weaker section (EWS) category for admission in postgraduate MD/MS in Haryana from this session. The division bench comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain and Justice Jaswant Singh has passed these orders while dismissing a review petition filed by Vikram Pal and others, who had applied for admission into the post graduate medical courses in Haryana.    

HC IMPOSES RS. 50K ON REVIEW PETITION

FACTS:

The Punjab and Haryana high court on Friday stayed counseling for admissions to postgraduate medical courses in Haryana. The HC bench of Justice RK Jain and Justice Jaswant Singh passed the order on the plea of Dr Vikram Pal and others, who had approached the high court challenging the April 15 notification on the procedure for admission to MD/MS courses with details about reservation in various categories. The counseling for 156 seats was scheduled to be held on May 4 and May 5. They had argued that the reservation in any case could not go beyond 50% as laid down by the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney case in 1992. The HC was told that reservation went up to 87% as per the notification put out by the Haryana government. A response from the state has been sought by May 6. The government had reasoned that 25% seats for institutional preference and 5% seats for the physically handicapped as well as 10% for the economic weaker section category should not be counted and if these categories are excluded, the reservation does not cross the cap of 50%. However, the bench observed that their response does not substantiate the argument as petitioners had demonstrated that out of the total 156 seats, the open category seats have got reduced to 31 only.

Also Read- Challenging Competitive Exam in High Court Chandigarh

LAW/SECTION APPLICABLE:

Supreme Court: In an appeal seeking clarity on the issue of the legality and validity of domicile/residence-based reservation for admission to the Post Graduate Medical Courses (MD/MS Courses 2019) Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh, a 2-judge bench of AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ has referred the said question to a larger bench. The bench, however, observed: “Prima facie, it appears that even if domicile/residence-based reservation in admission to PG Medical Courses is held permissible, the mode and modalities for its application would still require further examination because it remains questionable if such reservation could be applied by way of such stipulations, as made in the impugned Clause 2B of the prospectus in question.” The Court was hearing the appeals against Punjab and Haryana High Court order dated 23.04.2019, wherein it was held that the provisions made by the Medical College in question in its prospectus were invalid, so far relating to the domicile/residence-based reservation as provided in UT Chandigarh Pool; and had struck down the same while directing that all the admissions made on the basis of such invalid reservation in the said Medical College be cancelled and fresh admission process for admission to the PG Medical Courses for the academic year 2019-20 be carried out on the basis of merit obtained by the candidates in National Eligibility-Cum-Entrance Test.

Also Read- PIL in Punjab Haryana Chandigarh

MY OPINION/VIEWS:

“This would effectively result in entire of the State Quota seats going to institutional preference alone. Now, if the entire State Quota seats are provided for institutional preference alone, the consequence would be that only the candidates of the medical institutions in the State/UT would be filling up the State Quota seats; and such a consequence may not be permissible at all.”

Having made the above mentioned observations, the Court referred the following questions to a larger bench,

  1. Whether providing for domicile/residence-based reservation in admission to “PG Medical Courses” within the State Quota is constitutionally invalid and is impermissible?
  2. (a) If answer to the first question is in the negative and if domicile/residence-based reservation in admission to “PG Medical Courses” is permissible, what should be the extent and manner of providing such domicile/residence-based reservation for admission to “PG Medical Courses” within the State Quota seats?(b) Again, if domicile/residence-based reservation in admission to “PG Medical Courses” is permissible, considering that all the admissions are to be based on the merit and rank obtained in NEET, what should be the modality of providing such domicile/residence based reservation in relation to the State/UT having only one Medical College?
  3. If answer to the first question is in the affirmative and if domicile/residence-based reservation in admission to “PG Medical Courses” is impermissible, as to how the State Quota seats, other than the permissible institutional preference seats, are to be filled up?

Also Read- Quashing by High Court Chandigarh

 CONCLUSION:

The HC bench of Justice RK Jain and justice Jaswant Singh passed the order on the plea of Dr Vikram Pal and others, who had approached the high court challenging the April 15 notification on the procedure for admission to MD/MS courses with details about reservation in various categories.

For case specific advice, please contact Writs in Punjab Haryana High Court Best/Expert Lawyers Advocates for Petition in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali.

This post is written Vishishta Mishra

For more info, dial 99888-17966