NEET counselling: AP HC allows round 1, 2 MBBS candidates to retain allotted colleges as options, exercise fresh choices in round 3
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Vijayawada: Granting relief to the medical aspirants who were allotted MBBS seats in the first and second phases of NEET counselling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has allowed them to retain their present colleges as options while also exercising choice options for other colleges in the third phase of counselling.
The HC bench of Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Challa Gunaranjan passed an order in this regard on Tuesday after a clarification was issued by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences during a hearing of a case filed by an MBBS aspirant.
According to a Deccan Chronicle report, the case before the High Court bench was filed by a BC-B category candidate who had joined Guntur Medical College under the reserved category in the first round of counselling.
The petitioner secured a 31,325 rank in the National Eligibility-Entrance Test (NEET) and was allotted a seat at Guntur Medical College under the reservation category, despite being eligible for a seat at the same college under the meritorious reserved candidate category.
Allegedly, during the first phase, the candidate had opted for a limited number of colleges. During the second phase of counselling, he attempted to exercise more choices. However, the candidate alleged that the options for the remaining colleges disappeared from the system after he entered choices for two colleges.
It was alleged by the petitioner that during the second phase of counselling, the web portal deactivated other college options after the petitioner selected the college where he had already joined. Due to this, he could not be considered for a seat under the meritorious reserved candidate category.
Following this, the candidate moved the High Court seeking relief. His counsel Tagore Yadav Yaragorla contended that the notification issued by NTRUHS allowed candidates to exercise options for all colleges.
Referring to Rule 6 (ix) (b) of the Admission Rules, 2004, as substituted by GO MS 102 dated July 30, 2026, which allowed options in colleges of the candidate's choice in each phase, the petitioner's counsel argued that a software restriction could not take away the right conferred on candidates under the rules and the notification.
On the other hand, the counsel for NTRUHS, Sreedevi, denied that any of the options had been disabled by the web portal. She further clarified that the candidates allotted a college in an earlier phase could exercise options for every other college in the third phase of counselling.
After taking note of the clarification issued by the University, the HC bench found that no cause of action survived and disposed of the plea. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to exercise his options in the forthcoming phase of counselling.
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.