SC junks MBBS aspirant's plea to swap MCC seat for cheaper option, cites risk of wasting medical seat

New Delhi: Dismissing a plea filed by an MBBS aspirant, the Supreme Court has recently refused to change her allocation of a seat in the National Eligibility-Entrance Test Undergraduate (NEET) 2025 counselling process.

Approaching the Supreme Court, the aspirant had prayed for permission to vacate the seat allocated to her by the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC), to secure a more affordable option.

However, while considering the plea, the top court bench comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar observed that allowing the student to vacate her MCC-allotted seat just to secure a cheaper option could ultimately lead to the wastage of a medical seat for the entire academic year. This, according to the Supreme Court, is a matter of public interest, given the country's demands for medical education. Further, the bench stressed that the court would not risk the loss of a valuable medical seat at this advanced stage of admissions.

Also Read: Madras HC relief to MBBS aspirant who missed fee deadline due to financial constraints

As per the latest media report by Deccan Herald, the Court emphasised preserving the integrity of the admission process and also stressed on ensuring that valuable medical seats do not remain vacant due to mid-cycle changes.

She approached the Court seeking relief after being denied the opportunity to switch from her existing MCC-allotted medical college seat to a provisionally allotted seat under the Karnataka Examinations Authority (KEA). The plea, filed by the medical aspirant, highlighted the hardships that the students face due to sudden policy changes and when additional seats are issued after the conclusion of earlier rounds of counselling.

The concerned medical aspirant had participated in the counselling process for UG medical admissions by MCC. During the counselling, she was allotted a seat at KLE Jagadguru Gangadhar Mahaswamigalu Moorsavirmath Medical College, Hubballi.

According to the candidate, she had to accept the seat owing to the lack of better options at the time and in order to secure her allotment, she also paid a substantial fee of Rs 19.2 lakh as mandated by the institute to confirm her admission.

Following this, KEA issued a fresh notification announcing the 3rd round of counselling, and in this round, 450 additional new seats, which were not part of the 1st and 2nd rounds of counselling, were included.

Due to these additional seats, the admission landscape altered, and candidates who had already exhausted their choices in MCC rounds, received new opportunities.

Thereafter, during the 3rd round of counselling under KEA, the petitioner was provisionally allotted a medical seat for which the annual fee was approximately Rs 1.66 lakh, which was much cheaper and affordable than the fee she had to pay in the MCC round.

Filing the plea, the petitioner sought the Court's permission to surrender her MCC seat and retain the seat allotted by the KEA and argued that the late introduction of additional seats placed her at a disadvantage and that she should not be penalised for an administrative change.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC), and advocate Subhash Sagar appeared for KEA.

After considering the arguments, the Court refused to grant relief to the petitioner. Even though it acknowledged the petitioner's financial concerned, the bench also underscored the larger implications of permitting such changes after admissions have been finalised.

Also Read: MBBS Aspirant moves Supreme Court After Losing Seat for missing fee payment deadline