Delhi High Court dismisses plea against GGSIPU to allocate 50% PG medical seats to its students

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the decision of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (GGSIPU) to reserve 50 percent state quota of PG medical seats to MBBS graduates from its own colleges.

Justice Jayant Nath said GGSIPU is following the dicta of the Supreme Court in various cases which have approved 'institutional reservation' upto 50 percent of the postgraduate seats.

“In view of the stated legal position, this is clearly permissible. The pleas of the petitioners are clearly without merit. There is no merit in the present petition. The same is accordingly dismissed,” the court said in its 32-page judgement.

In the petition, various MBBS graduates and students from Jamia Hamdard University had challenged the policy of GGSIPU of allocating the entire 50 percent state quota of postgraduate medical college seats to MBBS graduates from colleges affiliated only to itself by way of 'Institutional Preference'.

The plea sought direction to the university to amend its admissions guidelines /brochure for the academic year 2020-21 without reserving entire 50 percent state quota only for graduates of colleges affiliated to itself by way of 'Institutional Preference', as was done in previous academic years and to allow Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (HIMSR) MBBS graduates in the state-wise merit list.

The plea, through advocate Samar Bansal, said that admission to PG medical courses in India is made from two sources, 50 percent seats are filled up on the basis of the marks obtained in NEET in which medical graduates from across the country are eligible to appear and 50 percent are filled up on the basis of rules to be framed in accordance with the law by the State Government appointed authority limited to students who have appeared in NEET which is also called “state quota”.

It said this petition relates to 'state quota' and raised the question whether 'Institutional Preference', namely the right of an institution offering postgraduate courses to reserve such seats for undergraduate students from colleges affiliated to itself, can be permitted to be exercised while deciding the manner of allocation of 50 percent seats of state quota.

Another plea raised by the petitioners was that there is no specific decision taken by the Delhi government regarding the apportionment of the state quota.

It was urged by them that in the absence of a clear statutory stipulation or administrative direction permitting GGSIPU to allocate the entire state quota to the students of its own university, the same is illegal.

Delhi government standing counsel Ramesh Singh submitted that as per the Constitution, the government has the power to regulate. However, he said this is only an enabling provision and the government is following a 'hands-off policy'.

“In my opinion, the Government of NCT of Delhi is supporting the action taken by GGSIPU. No fault can be found merely because some formal communication has not been issued by the Government of NCT of Delhi,” Justice Nath said.

Advocate T Singhdev, representing the Medical Council of India, said as per the judgement of the Supreme Court it is for the appropriate authority or state to declare the policy and the authority in the present circumstances is GGSIPU.