Chhattisgarh High Court Seeks State's Stand On Plea Challenging Alleged Domicile Based Reservation In PG Medical Admissions

The Chhattisgarh High Court sought the State's stand on a plea challenging vires of Rule 11(a) and portion of Rule 11(b) of the State Medical Post Graduate Admission Rules 2021 on the ground that it grants institution and residence based reservation in PG medical admissions. The plea challenges Rule 11(a) which it claims gives preference in admission to those candidates who have either obtained MBBS degree from a college in the state or who are serving candidates.Serving candidates would mean those who are currently employed. It also challenges part of Rule 11(b) which says if the seat is vacant after admission is over under 11(a) then admission for vacant seats will be given to those who are natives of the state but have graduated from colleges from outside the state. The plea claims that this discriminates among students having domicile of Chhattisgarh by dividing them in two categories– (i) those who passed from medical colleges of Chhattisgarh; and, (ii) those who have domicile of Chhattisgarh, but obtained MBBS degree from colleges situated outside Chhattisgarh.It further claims that giving admission to the candidates who belongs to category in Rule 11(b), only on the seats remaining after admitted all the candidates belonging to category specified in category of Rule 11(a) is a colorable exercise of power of proving 100% reservation to the candidate, who belongs to category in Rule 11 (a). It claims that and in view of Rule 11(a) and part of the Rule 11 (b) of the PG Admission Rules, 2021, the "residence based reservation and institution-based reservations" are violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India because it creates an unjustifiable classification between the State of Chhattisgarh and all others. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru granted time to the State to file counter, and further two weeks for the petitioner to file rejoinder.The petitioner, who was stated to be a permanent resident of Chhattisgarh, appeared in NEET(UG) Examination in 2018 and on the basis of her All India Rank and counselling, was allotted VMKV Medical College and Hospital, Salem. She completed the MBBS course in 2023, and further completed the compulsory rotating medical internship and obtained her medical registration certificate from the Tamil Nadu Medical Council and the Chhattisgarh Medical Council. She thereafter appeared for NEET(PG) 2025, and was eligible to get admission in post-graduate medical courses.The NBEMS has declared the result, but the date of counselling for seeking admission has yet not been declared. In her writ petition, the petitioner contends that the application of the sub-rules amounted to 100% reservation to candidates who got MBBS degree from Chhattisgarh.The petitioner further argued that the sub-Rules run contrary to the dictum of Dr. Tanvi Bhel v. Shreya Goel (2025), where the Supreme Court held that domicile or residence-based reservation in PG medical admissions is unconstitutional.The matter is now listed after four weeks. Case Title: DR. SAMRIDDHI DUBEY v/s THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARHCase Number: WPC No. 4702 of 2025Click Here To Read/Download Order

Chhattisgarh High Court Seeks State's Stand On Plea Challenging Alleged Domicile Based Reservation In PG Medical Admissions

Saahas Arora

Tags