Doctors Seek 1:5 Seat to Candidate Ratio in NEET PG Counselling: Supreme Court asks to approach HC

Refusing to entertain the petition, the top court bench comprising of Justice DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna suggested that the petitioners should move the concerned High Court regarding the matter, reports Live Law.

"You are concerned with in-service reservation of candidates in West Bengal. This is not an all-India issue. Go to the High Court," noted the top court bench.

Consequently, the counsel appearing for the petitioners, Dr. Charu Mathur sought liberty from the court to withdraw the plea.

Also Read: NEET PG Candidates challenge 40 percent inservice Quota in WB: SC junks plea

As per the latest media report by Live Law, the petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution had sought directions upon MCC to follow the 1:5 seat to candidate ratio in NEET PG admissions, as directed by the Supreme Court in Anand S Biji vs State of Kerala decision.

Condition 3 of the said judgment had mentioned, "A total of 5 times of number of seats available for allotment or all qualified candidates whichever is less, will be given chance to participate in online counselling (allotment process)."

Arguing that the Central Government has flouted that condition and resultantly made the competition for unreserved category even more competitive, the plea stated, "It is amusing to note that at one hand Centre is flouting directions of the Top Court and on the other hand they are subjecting results of the exam to the judgements/orders of the Court."

Contending that the Centre had complied with the condition until 2017, the petitioners claimed that the Government and other respondents were deceitfully" relying on Top Court's order dated May 9, 2017 passed in Dar Us Salam Educational Trust and Others v MCI for justifying their act.

In fact the petitioners contended that the said matter of the Educational Trust was related to rights of minorities in educational institutions and deemed universities and it didn't concern the filter of ratio of candidates in counselling following the condition put in place by the top court.

During the hearing of the case on Monday, the counsel for the petitioners, Advocate Charu Mathur argued, "They have done away with the seat ratio in PG. They were following it till 2014. It will have pan India implications."

However, responding to this, the top court judge Justice D. Y. Chandrachud was quoted observing by Live Law, "You are concerned with in-service reservation of candidates in West Bengal. This is not an all-India issue. Go to the High Court...Whatever we decide in EWS will obviously cover you on the EWS issue. On the in-service candidates reservation, you can move the High Court."

Suggesting that the petitioners should move to the High Court regarding the matter, the bench noted, "Dr Charu Mathur, appearing for the petitioners, seeks permission of the court to withdraw the petition under article 32 in order to enable the petitioners to move the High Court under article 226 of the Constitution. The petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn."