Children Of Private-Sector Employees Studying Outside State Can Be Excluded From State Quota: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by Bonafide Himachali students who were denied eligibility for MBBS/BDS admissions under the State Quota.The Court held that even though the petitioners were Himachali and had qualified NEET they were not eligible for state quota as they had completed part of their schooling outside Himachal Pradesh due to their parents' private employment outside the State. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel remarked that: “With respect to the private employees also, when once parents have moved outside in a private employment and wards obtaining education outside, they are not likely to come back, thus, their exclusion as aforestated footing cannot be said to be irrational or illegal.”The petitioners, successfully qualified NEET-UG 2025 and some of them were Bonafide Himachalis and some were children of Bonafide Himachalis. However, they were barred from seeking admission in the Medical Institutions in the State of Himachal Pradesh under the state quota seats. They were denied admission on the ground that their parents were employed outside Himachal Pradesh in the private sector. In response, the petitioners submitted that during the previous academic sessions, Bonafide Himachali students or children of Bonafide Himachali were eligible for State Quota irrespective of their place of schooling. The Court noted that even though the earlier admission process permitted Bonafide Himachali students to compete for State Quota seats irrespective of their place of schooling, the eligibility criteria had been revised by the State and the University. Relying on the Division Bench's decision in Harshit Bansal v. State of Himachal Pradesh, the court remarked that “The Government which bears the financial burden of running Government colleges, is entitled to lay down criteria for admission to its own colleges… provided classification is not arbitrary and has reasonable connection with the object of Rules.”Thus, the Court concluded that the admission conditions were neither arbitrary nor discriminatory and did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.Case Name:Aarav Potan & others v/s State of H.P. and others Case No.: CWP No. 11924 of 2025 a/w CWPs No. 11839, 11970, 12021 and 12046 of 2025Date of Decision: 26.11.2025For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Senior Advocate, with M/s Sanjay Ranta and Tejasvi Dogra, Advocates, M/s Sneh Bhimta, V.B. Verma, Mukul Sharma, Advocates, for the petitioners(s) For the Respondents: Mr.Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents- State, in all the petitions. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Pandey, Advocate, for respondent-AMRU, in all the petitions.Mr. Aman Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate, for the private respondent, in the respective petitions.Click Here To Read/Download Order

Children Of Private-Sector Employees Studying Outside State Can Be Excluded From State Quota: HP High Court

Mehak Aggarwal

Tags