NEET-SS : Supreme Court Reserves Interim Order On Plea Challenging 50% Reservation In Super Speciality Courses In Tamil Nadu

On Monday, the Supreme Court heard the submissions in the plea challenging constitutional validity of G.O. dated 07.11.2020 issued by the State of Tamil Nadu for reserving 50% of the seat at the Super Speciality level in Government Medical Colleges to in-service-doctors. The matter was heard for the limited aspect of interim relief. After hearing submissions made by the Counsels for the parties, a Bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai has reserved the interim order. Senior Advocate, Mr. Dushyant Dave, appearing on behalf of the petition in one of the batch matters, submitted that the G.O. so issued, was completely unconstitutional and without any authority. To substantiate his submission he referred to the NEET-SS Bulletin for the academic year 2020-2021. He informed the Bench that a similar Bulletin had been issued for the present academic year i.e. 2021-2022. "Scope of NEET SS[…]No state government/private medical college/Universities including the UT of Jammu & Kashmir shall be conducting any separate entrance for admission to their DM/MCh Courses for the academic session 2021-22"Thereafter, he referred to Clause 10.10, which deals with reservation of seats for admission to Super Speciality courses. "10.10.Reservation: As per judgment of the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court of India Writ Petition (C) No. 350 of 1998, there is no reservation of seats for super specialty DM/M.Ch. courses." The Bench enquired about the date when the impugned GO was issued. Mr. Dave responded that it was issued on 07.11.2020. He submitted that it appears that the rationale behind the issuance of the G.O. was largely based on the decision of the Apex Court in Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association v. Union of India (2021) 6 SCC 568, wherein the power of the States acting under Entry 25 List III to enact special provisions for admissions for in-service doctors in medical courses including post-graduate courses was upheld. It was clarified that the said judgment did not pertain to in-service candidates at the Super Speciality level, but was only limited to PG courses. "It singularly relies on the judgment of the Constitutional Bench without understanding. Because that judgment was with respect to Post-Graduate." To make good his arguments, he relied on Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association (supra), as under - 4) the Medical Council of India which has been constituted under the provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 is the creature of the statute in exercise of powers under Entry 66 List I and has no power to make any provision for reservation, more particularly, for inservice candidates by the concerned States, in exercise of powers under Entry 25 List III; 5) that Regulation 9 of MCI Regulations, 2000 does not deal with and/or make provisions for reservation and/or affect the legislative competence and authority of the concerned States to make reservation and/or make special provision like the provision providing for a separate source of entry for inservice candidates seeking admission to postgraduate degree courses and therefore the concerned States to be within their authority and/or legislative competence to provide for a separate source of entry for inservice candidates seeking admission to postgraduate degree courses in exercise of powers under Entry 25 of List III; [...] 8) that the State has the legislative competence and/or authority to provide for a separate source of entry for inservice candidates seeking admission to postgraduate degree/diploma courses, in exercise of powers under Entry 25, List III. However, it is observed that policy must provide that subsequent to obtaining the postgraduate degree by the concerned inservice doctors obtaining entry in degree courses through such separate channel serve the State in the rural, tribal and hilly areas at least for five years after obtaining the degree/diploma and for that they will execute bonds for such sum the respective States may consider fit and proper;"He reiterated - "This subsection deals with only postgraduate degrees."The Bench asked him to limit his arguments to the issue of interim order - "Come to the point of interim order."Mr. Dave referred to the relevant portion from the interim order passed for the academic year 2020-2021 in Dr. Prerit Sharma And Ors. v. Dr. Bilu B.S. And Ors. Civil Appeal No. 3840 of 2020, with respect to reservation in Super Speciality courses. "Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned Additional Solicitor General supported the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioners that it has been clearly laid down by this Court in Jagdish Saran v. Union of India (1980) 2 SCC 768, Dr. Pradeep Jain & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (1984) 3 SCC 654, Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Another vs. State of M.P. and Others (1999) 7 SCC 120 and Indira Sawhney & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (1992 Supp. (3) SCC 217) that ...

NEET-SS : Supreme Court Reserves Interim Order On Plea Challenging 50% Reservation In Super Speciality Courses In Tamil Nadu

Sohini Chowdhury

Tags