NEET PG Counselling: Supreme Court Issues Notice to MCC over Plea Seeking Fresh AIQ Round 3
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) while considering the plea seeking to conduct All India Quota (AIQ) Round III of NEET PG 2024 Counselling afresh.
A group of postgraduate medical aspirants had approached the Supreme Court seeking relief as they pointed out that the Round III of the All-India Quota counselling for NEET-PG (AIQ round) started before the Round II of the State round of counselling concluded in certain states, especially Madhya Pradesh.
While considering the matter, the top court bench of Justices BR Gavai and K Vinod Chandran passed the order after taking note of the argument of the petitioners' counsel that due to the instances of seat blocking and delay in the completion of MP State Round II, there were lesser seats in the AIQ Round III and the candidates got lower subject category seats. Therefore, the senior counsel prayed for relief for the petitioners by allowing them to participate in the stray counselling.
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that approaching the Apex Court bench, the petitioners had argued that due to the clash in the counselling schedule for AIQ and State Quota since a lot of candidates from the State Quota who were otherwise not eligible to register for AIQ Round III, got a chance to register and block a seat in AIQ Round III when the State Round II Counselling opened.
Therefore, the candidates had the option to choose between the best option and leave the AIQ seat if they were getting a better seat in the State round of counselling. They argued that this situation caused prejudice to them as they were deprived of the seats that were blocked by the candidates from the States whose Round II did not commence earlier.
Further, the petitioners argued that the act of the MCC to conduct the AIQ Round III counselling before the completion of State Round II for all the States is also inconsistent with the schedule of NEET-PG counselling laid down by the Supreme Court in Dr. Ashish Ranjan and Others vs Union of India and Others.
Their main grievance was that they were not allowed a fair opportunity to participate in the AIQ Round III of the NEET PG Counselling, which violates their fundamental rights particularly under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
As per the latest media report by Live Law, the counsel for the petitioners explained that the structure of NEET-PG counselling was such that respective state rounds must start only after the respective AIQ rounds were completed, because AIQ seats are more in demand. That means, the sequence is AIQ Round I, State Round I, AIQ Round II, State Round II, so on and so forth.
It was submitted that except in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, Round 2 was duly completed in all States. While Rajasthan went to MCC and got an extension, Madhya Pradesh did not do the same and the Round III of the AIQ seats commenced while MP Round 2 was not over. The consequences of the same were explained by submitting that "As a result, what has happened is, any student in MP who participated in AIQ Round II and occupied seats, when the state round took place, they exited that. Those seats should have ideally been covered in AIQ Round III...but those seats could not come because only after AIQ Round III started did State Round II finish...In Round III, we got lesser seats and subject categories which are down the ladder...ideally, we would have got general medicine, cardiology, etc...today we are given anesthesia, dermatology..."
Further, the counsel mentioned that since the petitioner-candidates participated and got seats in AIQ Round III, they were not eligible to participate in the stray round, to which the better seats have gone.
After taking note of the argument that the stray round was not over, the Apex Court bench issued notice to the authorities including MCC and listed the matter for further hearing on February 7, 2025.
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.