New Delhi: The Supreme Court is soon going to take a call on the plea seeking time for fresh registration of NRI candidates before the mop-up round of NEET counselling as the top court bench reserved the order in the plea on Thursday.
A Division bench of Supreme Court, comprising of Justices DY Chandrachud and Bela Trivedi reserved the order after all the parties- the State of Kerala, the NRI students and the Kerala Private Medical College Management Association- concluded their arguments in the case.
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that some NRI students had recently approached the Supreme Court seeking time for fresh registration before the mop-up round of NEET counselling. Apart from issuing notice in the matter, the top court had also directed the State of Kerala to inform the court about the unfilled vacant seats after the mop-up round.
The petitioner doctors approached the top court after the Kerala High Court dismissed a similar plea by the Kerala Private Medical College Management Association. It was submitted by the petitioner association that the rank list for eligible candidates in the NRI quota consisting of 618 rank holders got exhausted after two rounds of counselling. However, despite the exhaustion of the rank list, 57 seats in the NRI quota were lying vacant in the colleges under the association as on the date of filing the writ petition. It was contended that, since the money collected from the NRI students are utilized for benefiting students from economically weaker sections of the society, the respondents ought to have extended the period to fill up the vacant NRI quota seats.
When the matter reached the Supreme Court, the counsel for the petitioner students pointed out that 46 seats belonging to NRI quota were lying vacant and as per the rules those seats cannot be converted to any other category.
The top court had issued notice in the matter and directed the State of Kerala to inform the court about the unfilled vacant seats after the mop up round.
During the last hearing of the case, the top court bench had directed the State of Kerala to carry out a fresh verification regarding the status of the NRI MBBS candidates and submit the report before the court.
Also Read: Supreme Court denies relief to doctor seeking registration as NRI candidate in NEET PG Mop-up round
As per the latest media report by Live Law, during the hearing of the case, the counsel for the State of Kerala, Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta informed the bench about three categories in which the students were divided. He submitted that at the Mop Up round, 4 candidates who had applied for the Mop Up Round of counselling were required to indicate the category for which they were applying.
Referring to the fact that NRI students were ready to pay NRI fees for good standard colleges, he was submitted, "This is a computerized process & if you fill up your option it'll automatically show up. If there were 4 persons who had opted NRI in colleges where three are NRI vacancies, the computer would have automaticity shown up and then the seats would have gone from 48 to 44. Persons who are getting it are in the merit much more. There are many more students in higher merit in the general category."
On the other hand, the counsel for the students, Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi submitted before the court that the exercise, which the state had carried out was like creating a category within a category. He further stressed on the fact that the State had flipped seats belonging to NRI category to General category at the time of Mop-Up round and pointed out that State could not flip seats as they had to conduct the stray counselling round.
"There is a category which is promulgated by the committee itself & these are all registered NRI candidates. When you issue notification in respect of mop up round, you have a fresh option to students & at that stage it was possible for any students to swap the categories. Despite the persons paying fees of 1 lakh, when they tried paying the NRI option, they weren't able to click that. So far as 7 students are concerned, they were registered at NRI. If there were not many students at the time of mop up, they should have conducted another round and they did the flip at the Mop Up stage. They could not have done it at the stage of mop up. They still had a round of stray counseling," he submitted at this outset.
Responding to this, Justice DY Chandrachud remarked, "Students also, you know, it's not a gamble. They wanted NRI seats in particular colleges."
Arguing that students who had registered the option as NRI should have been permitted to apply in different colleges, the counsel for NRI students Advocate Ahmadi submitted, "Before the High Court the impression sought to be given that there were enough NRI seats. We have been kept in the dark, all the NRI candidates. 614 registered as NRI for 385 seats and they were not informed that the seats were abegging. Question of seats being unavailed under 5.5.4 can only be done after the mop Up rounds. As on 30th March 2022, when a request was made to register NRI fresh applicants the comm itself represented that there were 300 NRI Applicants and thus there is no question of registering more students. Committee fully knew that there are enough NRI students. If they were told that they would be able to get admission, they would have opted for them as well."
Therefore, he urged the bench to cancel the 45 admissions, which had been granted by converting the NRI quota seats to General pool. He also pointed out the presence of an element of ambiguity in the entire process and argued that the process was done to eschew NRI candidates as the State wanted to include 45 general category candidates.
Meanwhile, the counsel appearing for Kerala Private Medical College Management Association, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave placed reliance on the ratio laid down in T.M.A.Pai Foundation & Ors vs State Of Karnataka & Ors, P.A. Inamdar & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors and Modern Dental College & Res.Cen. vs State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors and poinetd out that the State of Kerala was not informing what the law was.
"State is not telling what the law is. 11 Judges in TMA Pai, 7 in Inamdar, 3 in modern dental have unequivocally held that NRI seats are not to be filled by state quota and the management is supposed to fill the seats. This is a common misunderstanding on part of the state & state prospectus does not provide for conversion of seats. NRI seats are created by law under art 142 and the state is bound by that by virtue of 141. It's sad that the state has taken law into their own hands," submitted Advocate Dave.
Advocate Dave further blamed the State Prospectus for consisting "adhocism" and submitted, "Even if admissions are made contrary to requirement, students need to go. State has no power or jurisdiction & state admits it in the prospectus. There are adhodicms in Kerala prospectus."
"Everything has been done in secret. Nobody was given a single notice. Neither the institutions nor the students. There is a greater principle here & that is the law declared by the highest court of land and the rationale declared by this court & if that is ignored by the state. They have no statutory power to touch the seats & it's only the prospectus that they are relying on. NRI is inviolable. This matter deserves to be allowed & direct for fresh mop up in case of 45 seats & whoever is eligible, they need to be accommodated," he further added.
At this outset, the counsel for the State of Kerala, Advocate Gupta submitted requested the bench to allow them to file an affidavit and stated, "We have still not filed an affidavit, so far we have just been dealing with 7 students because it appeared that we have missed out something. & if it requires a long hearing, MCI should be heard. Kindly permit me to file my proper affidavit."
While responding to the submissions made by the students and the association, the counsel for the State claimed that the process followed by the State was transparent and submitted, "It's for a student to decide where he wants to make an application. Colleges can't come to court and say that you apply with us now. The time schedule is very short here so if someone says to give me further notice, call me up, that just cannot operate like this. Far from it being a fiddle, it's as transparent as it gets. It comes out of the computer and that's it. Every opportunity is given to the student to choose whatever they wish to do and in this case 12 persons have not given the doc and they didn't make it to the list. Now if we are confined to persons in the list, 7 there has been a detailed look at. Flipping is done in accordance with MCC guidelines."
"High Court has decided to give broad interpretation to the prospectus and they are inclusive classes. NRI comes under the head of general reservation in this prospectus. Today if it is held that there cannot be a conversion then these seats cannot be ipso facto offered to the students because you will have to allow their other prayer of reopening the registration alothergher to allow 19 persons and bring 12 persons- you will have to give them fresh oopp for documentation and if they could not give documentation in round1, 3 didn't exercise that option. This exercise is too far-fetched. This is a practical solution and older judgments were before the current round of legislation taking place. Seats have been occupied by persons who are higher in merit," he further submitted to the Court.
Taking note of all the submissions made by all the parties, the top court bench has reserved the order on Thursday.
To read the court order, click on the link below.
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/supreme-court-nri-order-reserved-175804.pdf
Also Read: Carry out fresh verification of MBBS aspirants who claimed as NRI Candidates: SC tells Kerala
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.