SC declares domicile-based reservations in PG medical courses unconstitutional
What's the story
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that domicile-based reservations in postgraduate (PG) medical courses are impermissible as they are unconstitutional.
The verdict was pronounced by a three-judge bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and SVN Bhatti.
They held that such reservations violate Article 14 of the Constitution, which provides for equality before the law.
Admission criteria
Merit-based admissions, no provincial domicile: SC
The bench ruled that admissions to PG medical courses under state quotas should be made purely on the basis of merit as determined by the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET).
They rejected the idea of a provincial or state domicile, stressing, "There is only one domicile."
"We have the right to choose residence anywhere in India and to carry out trade and profession anywhere. Constitution also gives us the right to choose admission in educational institutions across India."
Reservation limit
Domicile-based reservations permissible only for MBBS courses
"But considering the importance of specialised doctors in PG medical courses, reservation in higher levels on the basis of residence would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution," Justice Dhulia said.
The court, however, clarified that while some degree of domicile-based reservation is permissible for undergraduate (MBBS) courses.
The Supreme Court's ruling will alsi not impact students already enrolled or those who have completed their PG education under existing domicile-based schemes.
Case background
Ruling won't impact current students, originated from Punjab HC
The case stemmed from appeals against a decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in relation to the PG admissions at the Government Medical College and Hospital, Chandigarh.
The high court held some aspects in the medical college's prospectus invalid, specifically those relating to domicile or residence-based reserving as provided in the UT Chandigarh Pool.
It was first heard by a two-judge bench in 2019 but was referred to a larger bench due to its significance.