HC relief: 93 BHMS Admissions regularised after a decade

Mumbai: To the great relief of 93 students enrolled in the Bachelor of Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery (BHMS) programmes across various institutions in Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court has upheld the legality of their admissions after 10 years of completion of course. The court noted that homeopathic colleges were exempt from adhering to the NEET-UG admission procedure beyond the first round of seat allotments.

The core dispute between the parties is that the Petitioner Association of Management of Homoeopathic Medical Colleges of Maharashtra and its member colleges were seeking to regularise admissions given to 93 students who were admitted during the academic years 2013-14 and 2014-15. This happened because the earlier existing practice of permitting the private Homeopathy colleges to fill in vacant seats on the basis of eligibility criteria issued by the Central Council for Homeopathy (CCH) was not followed. It was a time when NEET-UG was introduced in 2013.

The petitioners in the case included an association representing homeopathic colleges across the state, along with four individual institutions. Their argument centred on the autonomy of member colleges to admit students of their choosing, provided the criteria outlined by the Central Council of Homoeopathy (CCH) were met. This includes passing the Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC) examination with subjects in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology (PCB), and satisfying the required age limit.

According to the association, once students are admitted based on merit through either the state-level Common Entrance Test (CET) or NEET-UG, any remaining vacancies should be allowed to be filled by candidates who meet the minimum qualifications prescribed by the CCH. The association also highlighted that the Supreme Court has previously recognized their right to conduct their own entrance examinations for such admissions.

It was further mentioned that the rules framed by the State for conducting CET for admission to health sciences courses are provided under Rule 4.10 for admission to BHMS colleges. It does not mandate the students to secure any specific marks for being eligible for admission to member colleges. The said rule simply mentions that a candidate will be selected on the basis of merit in CET. Thus, CET is only a criterion for deciding inter-se merit and not an eligibility for admission. In any case, CCH is the highest statutory body in the field, and it does not prescribe admission through CET only, but simply provides that admission should be affected on the basis of HSC marks. Under the Rules, the State Government can conduct only the first round of admission, and vacant seats thereafter were allowed to be filled by the Association or colleges for many years, from 2007 till the academic year 2012-13.

For AY 2013-14, the State of Maharashtra conducted NEET-UG in routine course and forwarded a select list of the candidates after the first round of admission process to the member colleges, who were admitted. However, since seats remained vacant, the Petitioner Association issued an advertisement and requested the candidates who appeared in CET to apply for vacant seats. However, even then, 58 seats remained vacant in various member colleges.

The Association, following its usual practice since 2005, applied multiple times to the Samiti (Admissions Regulation Committee constituted after the directions of the Supreme Court called Pravesh Niyantran Samiti, is referred to as 'the Samiti') for permission to fill these seats with students who had passed HSC with PCB subjects, as per CCH norms. Despite their efforts, including requesting an extension of the admission deadline (granted until 30.11.2013), the Samiti failed to respond or grant permission, later stating it lacked jurisdiction. Consequently, the Association admitted eligible HSC students on merit and filed a writ petition after MUHS refused to grant eligibility, stating admissions must be via CET.

The Association challenged this decision in court. The Aurangabad Bench transferred the petition regarding BHMS admissions to the principal seat of the Bombay High Court to be heard with a similar ongoing case. Meanwhile, the Petitioner Association and its member colleges filled vacant seats with HSC (PCB) qualified candidates on merit, pending court approval. However, MUHS denied eligibility on 05.12.2013, citing the lack of DMER sanction and insisting that admissions must be through CET.

For 2014–15, the Association again filled seats after the CET/NEET-UG first round through local advertisements, but some seats still remained vacant. When these admissions were sent for approval, MUHS and the Samiti raised objections. As a result, multiple petitions were filed for the affected students. Several interim applications, including requests for results, certificates, and internships, remain pending in court.

After considering the submissions, the court observed, “Clause 4.10 of the said brochure provided that for the BHMS college, candidates will be selected on the basis of merit in NEET UG-2013. This clause is interpreted by the Respondent Samiti to mean that no student can be selected for BHMS outside of NEET-UG-2013 process. But this stand simply overlooks Clause 9.2.6 which provided that as per directives of the High Court, Mumbai in Review Petition No. 8634 of 2007 in Writ Petition No. 6332 of 2005 only one round of private Homeopathic Medical College will be carried out during first round of admission of 85% seats of the total intake capacity. This clause is important as the brochure itself recognises that only one round of private Homeopathic Colleges will be carried out during the first round of admission.”

“We reiterate that the concerned students have already been protected by the interim orders of this Court, under which they have been permitted to appear for examination, their results have been declared, and they have already passed the homeopathy course. After a period of about 10 years or more, concerned students of the Petitioner Colleges must get a closure and clarity about the cloud hanging over their eligibility,” the bench further added.

The court has also instructed MUHS to issue or release all pending marksheets / degrees / other certifying documents and/or original documents of the concerned 93 students (whichever applicable, depending on completion of the course), if not already issued/released, within a period of four weeks.