Summary
Maharashtra's admission brochure for state-quota postgraduate medical seats provided that the in-service quota would follow any change the Government made from time to time. Days after registration opened, a Government Resolution of 26 September 2022 reserved 20% of degree seats for in-service doctors. Non-in-service candidates argued that this changed the rules of the game midway, relying on Prerit Sharma. The Supreme Court dismissed their appeal. Unlike Prerit Sharma, where the bulletin expressly excluded reservation, here the brochure itself warned of changes. In-service degree reservation had existed before Dinesh Singh Chauhan and was permitted again by the Constitution Bench in Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association. Following Neil Aurelio Nunes, the rules were not altered after the process began. Unfilled in-service seats would revert to other candidates on merit.
Issues
- Whether the Government Resolution of 26 September 2022 reserving 20% of state-quota postgraduate medical degree seats for in-service candidates could apply to academic year 2022-23, having been issued after the admission process began.
Provisions considered
- Regulation 9(IV) and (VII), Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000Following Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association, Regulation 9 does not bar States from providing a separate in-service channel for degree courses, and weightage for service in remote areas applies to in-service candidates. (¶¶ 20, 21, 22, 28)
- Entry 25, List III, Constitution of IndiaStates are competent to provide a separate source of entry for in-service doctors to postgraduate degree and diploma courses. (¶¶ 21, 22)
Held
- Clause 7.2 of the brochure expressly made in-service reservation subject to any change by the Government from time to time, so candidates were on notice and the Resolution did not change the rules of the game after the process began. (¶¶ 28, 31, 32, 33)
- Prerit Sharma is distinguishable because there the bulletin specifically provided for no reservation and the process was at its final stage; here in-service degree reservation had a history and was restored after the Constitution Bench decision. (¶¶ 26, 31)
- The selection criteria were not changed after commencement, so the decisions in B. Swapna and Rajendra Bhimrao Mandve do not assist the appellants; the reduced NEET-PG cut-off and reversion of unfilled in-service seats under clause 7.10 meet the concern about vacant seats. (¶¶ 34, 35, 36)
Result
Appeal dismissed, though for the reasons given by this Court, upholding the Bombay High Court's refusal to exclude the 20% in-service reservation for academic year 2022-23.