NEET Relaxation beyond limit unacceptable: HC imposes Rs 50 lakh fine on dental colleges, Rs 25 lakh compensation to each student

Jaipur: Holding that relaxation in the NEET percentile beyond the limit prescribed by the state, will adversely impact the high and uniform standards of medical education, the Rajasthan High Court has recently dismissed the plea against the single bench order directing the discharge of the 2016 batch students from the BDS course. The bench herein imposed a fine of Rs 50 lakh on the concerned dental colleges and also ordered them to pay Rs 25 lakh each as compensation to the affected students.

These students were admitted into Dental colleges after being granted relaxation beyond 10% and an additional 5% in the NEET percentile in the academic year 2016.

The division bench of Justice Yogendra Kumar Purohit and Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati heard the appeal and held, “All the students, who have been admitted after giving relaxation beyond 10% and an additional 5%, if not discharged, shall stand discharged from the BDS course with immediate effect.”

The Case:

The Rajasthan High Court bench was moved petitions filed by BDS students who were granted admissions in the year 2016 by giving relaxation beyond 10% and 5%, as even after counselling a large number of seats remained vacant in the dental colleges of Rajasthan. According to the information presented to the court, against 892 seats in 11 dental colleges, only 225 candidates opted for BDS Course.

Taking cognisance of the situation, the State of Rajasthan allowed a reduction of the NEET percentile to the extent of 10% and an additional 5% was granted to the Federation for Private Medical and Dental Colleges of Rajasthan.

However, in order to fill the vacant seats, some dental colleges granted BDS admission to the petitioner students for the 2016-17 academic session by relaxing the NEET percentile beyond the limit as mandated by the state. As a result, irregular admissions were made and unqualified NEET candidates were allotted seats.

Thereafter, in October 2016, the Union government requested the state to withdraw and cancel the orders pertaining to a reduction in the percentile for admission to the BDS Course. Subsequently, a respondent in the case- the Dental Council of India (DCI) in 2017, issued a direction for the discharge of those students from the Course, who though did not qualify NEET, but were admitted on the basis of lowering down of the percentile despite the state’s permission.

Then the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (RUHS), which regulates dental colleges, passed an order, declaring the appellants and other similarly situated students ineligible for the BDS Course, as per the eligibility criteria prescribed by the DCI.

Aggrieved, the students filed writ petitions before the Single Bench of the High Court against the decision and in 2018, the High Court decided that the students who have been granted admission by applying the relaxation to the extent of 10th percentile and 5th percentile shall not be disturbed and their admission stands regularized.

“In fact, the State too while acting on the letter of the Central Government dated 29.09.2016 permitted reduction only to the extent of 10% and additional 5%. Therefore, the Institution at their own level continued to reduce till the last seat was filled without adhering to the extent of 10% and additional 5%,” the bench had noted.

However, the court had also ruled that all students who have been admitted after giving relaxation beyond the limit shall stand discharged.

Thus, challenging the judgment passed by the Single Bench, the appeals were preferred before the apex court submitting that Rajasthan Dental College & Hospital addressed a letter in September 2016 to the respondent- Union of India, on the ground that there is urgency in the matter as the deadline of 30.09.2016 was approaching, and therefore, the minimum qualifying marks in NEET 2016 ought to be reduced appropriately.

It was contended before the bench that the Union of India forwarded the representation of the Federation to the state government, for taking the necessary action, as deemed fit. The Union of India delegated its powers of taking decision in the matter regarding relaxation in percentile to the state, as the representation of the Federation was relating to relaxation in percentile for the purpose of admissions in the BDS Course.

“Therefore, it is clear that the decision taken by the state government, upon being delegated the necessary powers by the Union of India in that regard, does not suffer from any infirmity or ambiguity,” the counsel on behalf of the BDS students argued.

It was then submitted that looking into the large number of unfilled seats in the BDS Course, the Union of India has already lowered down the percentile many-a-times, owing to the interests of the student community. Therefore, the entire action of the State in lowering down the percentile for admissions in the BDS Course was justified.

Relying upon the Apex Court case of Harshit Agarwal and Ors.v Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors, the counsel contended that methodology of lowering the percentile was devised every year, until the seats were filled.

It was further submitted that the purpose of the NEET Examination is not to decide the respective merit of the students, and thus, once the exam was conducted and seats were still lying vacant, then lowering down of the percentile for the purpose of filling up such vacant seats was justified.

On the argument from the government that NEET examination was introduced with an object of enhancing the standards of education in the field of medical science and the recommendation of lowering down the percentile was not acceptable on the ground that there were sufficient numbers of candidates available to fill the vacant seats of the BDS Course, the counsel for the petitioners said, “The decision of lowering down of the percentile for admission in the BDS course has also not resulted into reduction in the standards of the education in any manner whatsoever, and thus, the decision of granting the relaxation in question cannot be done away with in the manner, as done.”

At this juncture, the authorities argued, “The decision of lowering down the percentile in NEET, so as to induct such students in the BDS Course, who even could not qualify the examination on count of their securing lower marks, is a glaring example of backdoor entry, which cannot be permissible in the field of medical education, owing to its widespread ramifications.”

The Conclusion:

Deliberating on all the arguments made by the counsels of both parties, the high court bench observed that as held by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment, that after 5th Amendment of the Revised BDS Course Regulations, 2007, Regulation 6(ii) thereof, dealing with minimum percentile for different classes in the NEET for admission in the BDS Course, clearly reveals that the requirement of securing minimum marks is not mandatory in nature; the Regulation itself provides that “when sufficient number of candidates in the respective categories fail to secure minimum marks as prescribed in National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test held for any academic year for admission to BDS Course, the Central Government in consultation with Dental Council of India may at its discretion lower the minimum marks required for admission to BDS Course for candidates belonging to respective categories and marks so lowered by the Central Government shall be applicable for the said academic year only.”

The bench agreed with the observation made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment that vide the letter dated 29.09.2016, the respondent-Union of India delegated the power to the respondent-State to take necessary action pertaining to the admission in BDS course.

“The entire action of the respondent-State, as taken by it, upon delegation of the requisite power by the respondent-Union of India itself, is justified in the eye of law, because the respondent Union of India itself stated that “necessary action as deemed fit”,” the bench said.

The court further observed that lowering down of the percentile by the State to the extent of 10 % and additionally by 5 percentile in exercise of the delegated power by the Union, clearly reveals that beyond the same, no further relaxation can be extended to any candidate aspiring to pursue the BDS Course in the State of Rajasthan.

However, the bench noted that the decision made by colleges to grant admissions to unqualified NEET candidates was unsustainable in the eyes of law. The court ruled,

“At the same time, this Court observes that the Colleges in question, for the purpose of giving admissions to the candidates against the vacant seats in the BDS Course, have granted relaxation beyond the one already granted by the respondent State, even to those students who have secured much lower marks [including zero / (-) percentile] in the NEET, which fact cannot lost sight of by the Courts, Central Government, State Governments, Union Territories Governments and other Authorities, and thus, such relaxation as granted by the Colleges in question cannot at all be acceptable, and sustainable in the eye of law, as, if such relaxation is accepted and sustained, the same would have adverse impact upon the high and uniform standards in the field of medical education”

Taking serious note of the matter, the bench slammed the colleges’ action and questioned, “How those students, having secured much lower percentile, including zero/(-) percentile, were given admission in the BDS Course by the Colleges in question, beyond the relaxation granted by the respondent-State, that too without obtaining any prior approval/sanction for doing the same.”

Ruling that no case is made out so as to grant any relief to any of the appellants in the present appeals, the bench dismissed the appeals and pronounced the following directions:

(a) All the students, who have been admitted after giving relaxation beyond 10% and additional 5%, if not discharged, shall stand discharged from the BDS course with immediate effect; in case any of such student(s) has already been awarded the Degree of the BDS Course, beyond the relaxation granted by the respondent-State, the same, if not already procured and deposited, shall be required to be procured by the concerned College, who in turn shall deposit the same with the concerned University within a period of one month from today, failing which the concerned University would be at liberty to initiate contempt proceedings against the College, who fails to do so.

(b) Each of such College(s), who have granted relaxation, beyond the one already granted by the respondent-State, are also liable to deposit a cost of Rs.50,00,000/- with the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee (RHCLSC), Jodhpur within a period of two months from today; the RHCLSC shall recover the same from the concerned College(s), strictly in accordance with law.

(c) The said College(s) shall pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- to each of such student(s) within a period of three months from today, as compensation, as the student(s) have been made to suffer on count of being given admission by the College(s), while extending the relaxation beyond the one already granted by the respondent State.

To view the HC order, click here