NEET PG Reservation in Kerala: HC Directs doctors to Ensure if more SEBC cases pending before Supreme Court
Kochi: While considering the plea challenging the increased reservation for socially and economically backward classes (SEBC) in the medical postgraduate courses the Kerala High Court on Tuesday directed the petitioners to ensure if identical petitions are pending before the Supreme Court.
The HC bench comprising of Justice N. Nagaresh, while taking the matter for consideration on a priority basis, also clarified that if identical petitions are pending before the top court, it would be inappropriate for the HC to adjudicate the case, reports Live Law.
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that a group of doctors had recently approached the High Court as they had challenged the decision of the State government to increase the reservation policy for socially and economically backward classes (SEBC) in the medical postgraduate courses.
The reservation for SEBC was previously 9% and it has now been increased to 27% by a recent circular. Challenging the decision of the state government, the petitioner doctors who have appeared in NEET-PG 2021 examination contended that the revision in the number of seats reserved violated the constitutional norms and caused serious prejudice to the merit of the petitioner doctors.
Filing the plea before the High Court, the petitioner doctors referred to the fact that the Apex Court while considering the constitutional basis for reservations in postgraduate and super specialty courses on various occasions, had observed that reservations have to be minimal at these levels.
Thus, contending that the State circular violated the spirit and content of the Supreme Court decision, the doctors further referred to the Apex Court judgment in the case of Dr. Preethi Sreevasthava v. State of MP in this context. In that judgment, the top court had clarified that at the super specialization level reservation would dilute the merit.
During the hearing of the case on Tuesday, while referring to several other judgments, the counsel for the petitioners, Senior Advocate Sukumaran submitted before the court that several similar matters were already pending before the Apex Court.
Taking note of this submission, the HC single judge bench directed the petitioners to ensure if the matters pending before the top court were about identical issues and clarified that in such a situation, it would be inappropriate for the High Court to intervene, adds Live Law.
The daily adds that the counsel for the petitioner also explained how horizontal and vertical reservations were disadvantageous and the court also took note of all such submissions in this regard and posted the matter for further hearing.