HC upholds cumulative PG residency across institutes, dismisses AIIMS Delhi plea in DM critical care admission row

New Delhi: Upholding a single bench order that had set aside the cancellation of a doctor's candidature for admission to the DM Critical Care Medicine course at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal filed by AIIMS.

Holding that his post-MD senior residency experience should be counted while calculating the required training period, the Bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia refused to interfere with the earlier order that had quashed the cancellation of his admission.

The bench observed, "The respondent was eligible for admission to the super-speciality course as he had completed 1026 days of training during his MD course and subsequently gained 96 days of senior residency experience after obtaining the MD degree. Together, this amounted to 1122 days of experience, which exceeds the 1095 days required under Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus."

The plea before the Single Bench was filed by Dr Shah, who secured an All India Rank of 4 in the Institute of National Importance Super-Speciality (INI-SS) January 2026 examination. The petitioner doctor had completed his MD (Anaesthesiology) residency across three NMC-recognised institutions due to counselling reshuffles during the Covid-19 pandemic, aggregating more than 1,095 days of training, which was duly certified by the Gujarat University.

However, the AIIMS rejected his candidature at the final stage, contending that during his PG course at GCS Medical College, Ahmedabad, he had completed only 1026 days of training between May 2, 2022 and February 21, 2025. As per Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus, candidates must complete 1095 days of training, and since he fell short of this requirement, the institute considered him ineligible for admission to the course.

Rejecting the AIIMS’ interpretation, the Single Bench held that eligibility conditions must be "clear, explicit and uniformly applicable" and cannot be supplemented by interpretative additions at a later stage.

"Once the language of the prospectus is clear and unequivocal, it cannot be left to the discretion of the institution to add words and interpret it in a manner not borne out from its plain reading," the Single bench held. It also held that Clause 4.3.2 of the INI-SS prospectus only mandates completion of "3 years (1,095 days)" of requisite qualification and tenure by the cut-off date and does not stipulate that such residency must be completed from a single institution.

Challenging the Single Bench judgement, the institution filed an appeal before the division bench. 

The counsel appearing for AIIMS once again argued the same that under Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus, candidates seeking admission to super-speciality courses must complete three years of training (1095 days) by January 31, 2026. Since the respondent had completed only 1026 days of training during his MD course at GCS Medical College, Ahmedabad, he did not meet the eligibility criteria.

He contended that the 15 days of training at Pramukhswami Medical College and 54 days at AMC MET Medical College cannot be counted, as the respondent did not complete his course at those institutions and only the training from the institution awarding the degree should be considered.

He further argued that the interpretation of the prospectus should be left to AIIMS and other experts, as matters relating to academic policy fall within their domain.

Defending the Single Judge’s order, counsel for the respondent doctor argued that he had completed the required postgraduate residency experience across three different institutions, and neither the AIIMS prospectus nor the Post-Graduate Medical Education Regulations (PGMER) 2023 framed by the National Medical Commission states that such experience must be obtained from a single institute. Therefore, the appellant’s claim that the required experience must come from only one institution was incorrect.

The counsel argued that the respondent was never declared ineligible at any stage of the admission process after submitting his application. He was offered a seat in the D.M. (Critical Care Medicine) programme at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, and therefore, the institute cannot later raise the issue of ineligibility. She added that under the doctrine of legitimate expectation, cancelling his candidature after allotting him a seat was unjustified.

She added that after completing his MD, the respondent worked as a Senior Resident for 96 days, which, when added to his 1026 days of MD training, brings the total to 1122 days, exceeding the required 1095 days.

Meanwhile, the National Medical Commission supported the arguments made by the appellant. The Commission submitted that Clause 2.1 of the PGMER-2023 prescribes the duration of a postgraduate course as three years, equivalent to 1095 days. 

According to the apex regulatory body, Clause 4.3.2 of the AIIMS prospectus reflects the same requirement, and any deviation from it cannot be allowed since the eligibility criteria have been set by experts. He further argued that courts should exercise caution while dealing with matters related to academic policy.

Regarding the submission made on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellant that any eligibility criteria for the purposes of making admission to Super-Speciality course in the field of medical education has to be left with the experts and while exercising powers of judicial review, the division bench held, "This Court has to be circumspect in interfering in such criteria, we may observe that it is settled position of law that the process of evaluation or selection of candidates for admission and the process of achieving the objective of selected candidates who will be better equipped to suit the specialised courses are all technical matters in academic field and therefore, the Court ought not interfere in such processes. Reference in this regard be placed on the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court..."

"Accordingly, the interpretation sought to be given by the appellant to Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus that experience in residency, to be counted for the purposes of determining the eligibility for admission to Super-Speciality course, shall necessarily be from one institute, is to be accepted. In our opinion, the reason as to why experience gained only in one institute has to be taken into consideration for the purposes of reckoning the eligibility in terms of Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus is that any experience gained in other two institutes, in the instant case, are not relevant, neither were they taken into consideration for the purposes of award of MD degree to the respondent No.1 the doctor"

The Bench further stated,

 "it is the experience which leads to the award of the MD degree that is relevant even for the purposes of determining the eligibility for seeking admission to the Super-Speciality course. In the instant case, the experience gained by the respondent No.1 in the earlier two institutes did not have any relevance so far as the award of MD degree is concerned for the reason that he was awarded the MD degree only on the basis of the experience gained while pursuing his MD degree in the third institute, namely GCS Medical College, Ahmedabad."

Reiterating that since determination of the eligibility criteria for admission to Super-Speciality course is related to academic policy and, therefore, such issues should be left to the experts, the court in this regard held,

"any interpretation sought to be given to Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus other than the interpretation which, as per AIIMS, is the correct interpretation will not be permissible. Accordingly, we have no hesitation in holding that for fulfilling the eligibility criteria as per Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus, the experience acquired or gained by the candidate in the institute from where he has been awarded the degree, alone can be taken into account and the experience gained in any other institute is not relevant."

The court observed that since AIIMS had earlier agreed in a similar case that to consider experience gained after the award of an MD degree, there was no valid reason to deny counting the 96 days of post-MD experience gained by the respondent while determining his eligibility for admission to the super-speciality course.

The bench also noted that the respondent had not concealed any information and had fully disclosed all relevant details while filling out the application form for the entrance examination.

"If we compare clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus issued by AIIMS for entrance examination for admission to January, 2025 session with Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus issued for making admission to January, 2026 session, we find that both are identical except that three years’ period occurring in the said Clause has now been made more explicit by mentioning that three years will be 365x3=1095 days. There is no difference, at all, between these two Clauses."

"We may also note that neither at the time of scrutiny of application forms nor at the time of declaration of ineligible candidates, did the AIIMS ever declare respondent no.1 to be ineligible. It is only at the end of the process i.e. when the respondent No.1 was offered a seat in D.M. (CCM) at AIIMS and he went to report for his joining on 01.01.2026 that he was first told verbally that he is ineligible and, thereafter, on the next date i.e. 02.01.2026, he was handed over the order cancelling his candidature. Such discrepancies had occurred in earlier examinations as well, which have been noticed by this Court in Dr. Kumar and this Court has disapproved the same," the bench held. 

Considering these facts, the bench found no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Single Judge. It directed that the 96 days of post-MD experience should be counted while determining the respondent’s eligibility for admission to the super-speciality course, noting that AIIMS had taken a similar stand in an earlier case.

To view the court order, click on the link below: 

Also read- PG residency can be counted cumulatively across institutes: HC quashes AIIMS Delhi rejection of doctor for DM critical care seat