NEET PG In-Service Quota: MP High Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Exclusion Of Central PSU Doctors From 30% Quota

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has issued notice on a writ petition challenging the exclusion of medical practitioners employed by Central Government establishments and Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) from the 30% in-service quota for postgraduate medical admissions in the State.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Alpesh Y Kogje and Justice Vivek Jain issued notice to the respondents and listed the matter for further hearing on November 25.

The petitioner, a doctor employed with NMDC Limited, a Central Public Sector Undertaking, has challenged the definition of an 'in-service candidate' under the Madhya Pradesh Medical Education Admission Rules, 2018, to the extent that it restricts eligibility to persons employed in departments or institutions of the State Government.

The petitioner has contended that medical practitioners serving in Central Government establishments and PSUs should also be considered for the 30% in-service quota, irrespective of whether their employer is the State Government.

He has submitted that he has rendered more than four years of medical service at a project hospital in a remote area of Panna district and that such service should be recognised for the purpose of in-service quota eligibility.

According to the petition, the project hospital is situated approximately 20 kilometres from Panna city, near the core area of the Panna Tiger Reserve. It caters to the medical needs of nearby villages and people residing and working in the surrounding areas. The petitioner has further stated that no State Government hospital is situated in the vicinity.

The petitioner has argued that excluding doctors employed by Central Government establishments and PSUs, despite the nature, duration and location of their medical service, is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

He has contended that the classification under the 2018 Rules fails to satisfy the test of intelligible differentia and rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved.

The petitioner has accordingly challenged the constitutional validity of the relevant definition under the Rules and sought permission to participate provisionally in the remaining rounds of NEET PG 2026 counselling without being rejected solely on the ground of his employment with a Central PSU.