NEW DELHI : The Medical Council of
India (MCI) has cancelled the admission of 778 MBBS
students who joined private colleges in Puducherry last
year for violating the Supreme Court’s guidelines,
reports the Hindustan Times.
All the seven private medical colleges in the Union
territory “haven’t demonstrated any evidence of fairness
and transparency in the admission process...” the MCI
said in a September 7, 2017 letter, cancelling the
The order came on the complaint of Puducherry
lieutenant governor Kiran Bedi, who said merit had been
sacrificed for money.
Bedi got complaints from parents alleging fraud and
ordered a probe which found that of the 1,200 students
who joined the bachelor of medicine, bachelor of
surgery, or MBBS, in 2016, 778 were admitted overlooking
the top court’s directives on the national
eligibility-cum-entrance test (NEET).
The state-run Indira Gandhi Medical College, which
has 150 seats, is in the clean as it followed the
While restoring NEET in 2016, the top court ordered
all states to designate a counselling authority to
prepare a list of successful candidates.
Puducherry, too, set up a centralised admission
committee (Centac) but the seven private colleges
admitted students directly, ignoring the panel.
Panchapakesan Ganesan, whose daughter was denied
admission, alleged that 778 admissions -- 770 under all
India quota and eight in state quota – were made
President of Puducherry UT All Centac Students
Parents Association M Narayanassamy wrote to Bedi, who
asked a committee led by a retired judge, Chitra
Venkatraman, to look into the charges.
Venkatraman’s report said the entire exercise
violated the Supreme Court order, as students with high
NEET scores were denied admission with money taking
precedence over marks. “At the hands of the private
medical colleges, merit has become a casualty,” Bedi
said in a letter to MCI.
‘WHY SPARE COLLEGES?’
The parents association has questioned the MCI’s
failure to act against the erring colleges.
“I am surprised why no action has been recommended by
the MCI against colleges? I feel disappointed as we
didn’t intend to destroy the career of students,”
NEET : Lodha panel against
bar on age, attempts
NEW DELHI: The
led Supreme Court-appointed committee has
reportedly vetoed a government move to cap the age of
students and the number of attempts they are allowed to
clear National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET).
The three member committee, headed by former chief
justice Lodha, said it was in favour of striking down
the government’s eligibility criteria because there is a
“dearth of doctors in the country”.
In January, the government issued an executive order
limiting to three the number of times a student could
take the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET).
It also capped the eligibility age of candidates at 25 –
both decisions made on the recommendations of the
Medical Council of India (MCI). Within days, the
government’s order faced legal challenge from students.
The Lodha panel made its recommendations on February 28.
The Supreme Court will take up the
panel’s suggestions on March 20. Should the court accept
those, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE),
which conducts NEET, might have to rework the
applications process that closed on March 1.
Earlier, an eligible student above the age of 17 could
apply, and there was no cap on the number of attempts.
The Lodha panel’s letter to the government did not make
any suggestions on an upper age limit or the number of
times a student could be take the exam.
Last May, as part of its efforts to clean
up medical education in India, the top court had asked
Justice Lodha to head an oversight committee for the
SC bars pvt colleges/assn to hold admission test
By Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI : Giving another pungent blow to private
college owners and their associations the Supreme Court
barred them from holding any kind of admission test for MBBS or BDS
seats. The bar will also be applicable on the deemed
universities, the court said.
The bench said "it is clarified that no
examination shall be permitted to be
held for admission to MBBS or BDS studies by any private
college or association or any private/deemed
Continuing daily hearing in
Sankalp Charitable Trust case
on May 6 2016 the three-judge bench of Justices Anil R. Dave, Shiva Kirti Singh and A.K. Goel said the
issue with regard to students who had appeared or who
are due to appear in examinations conducted by the
states in accordance with local laws, shall be decided
after hearing the Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar on May
The bench said students who had appeared for Neet
Phase-I on May 2 would not be permitted to take Neet
Phase-II. Those who could not appear for the phase-I
test may appear for the second phase on July 24.
The court is expected to allow Tamil Nadu to admit
students on the basis of marks in the higher secondary
exam. Students of states like Telangana, Andhra Pra-desh,
Kerala, Maharas-htra and Gujarat maybe allowed to admit
students on the basis of local CETs.
Senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan, submitted that if private
colleges are not allowed to make admissions through
their own CET or through the association of private
medical colleges, they were not obliged to surrender 50
per cent of their seats to the government quota and that
this would result in a piquant situation.
Mr Ranjit Kumar informed the court that the Centre had convened
a meeting this weekend with all the stake-holders. He
would inform the court on Monday of the outcome of the
meeting so that it can pass appropriate orders.
“We want NEET. On the legal side, we supported it. But I
have to take instructions if states can be allowed to
hold their tests this year or not. We want to resolve
the issue after discussing with them,” he said.
The order came as a window of hope for states opposing
NEET. The states contended that their students were not
prepared to take the test as some of them studied in the
is back, SC bench scraps earlier judgement
By Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI : In a landmark move the Supreme Court of
India on April 11, 2016 recalled its one of the most
controversial judgements --
case judgement -- and ordered that "the
case be heard afresh".
The case, called
National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET)
case was delivered on July 18, 2013 by the Chief Justice
of India Altamas Kabir a day
before he was to retire, giving ample relief to private
medical colleges. Some
private medical colleges had challenged the Medical
Council of India and Dental Council of India regulations
on admissions to medical and dental college -- and the
relief allowed them to have their way in the matter of
recall of the judgement
status quo ante has been restored and the MCI has
been told to organise a combined all-India admission
test for private and government medical colleges.
However, the MCI vice-chairman Dr C V
Bhirmanandham has expressed his inability to hold the
all-India test this year because of paucity of time and
this may allow the private players to have their way
this year as well.
Hearing the review petitions on April 11
the Constitution bench of the Supreme Court headed by
Justice A R Dave and comprising Justices A K Sikri, R K
Agrawal, A K Goel and R Banumathi recalled the
dated July 18, 2013 which had quashed NEET.
It said the “majority verdict“ delivered by then Chief
Justice Altamas Kabir did not consider an earlier SC
judgment that was binding on the bench, nor had he
consulted other members of his bench.
Incidentally Justice A R Dave, who headed
the 5-judge Constitution bench that recalled the earlier
order had given a dissenting verdict in the NEET case.
In his April 11 order he specified that he was not
consulted by the then CJI
The April 11 order comes just a month
before separate entrance tests are to be held for
government and private medical colleges, putting lakhs
of students in confusion. There are over 400 medical
colleges in the country and lakhs of students sit for
admission tests for over 52,000 MBBS seats. Since 2013,
state governments and private colleges have conducted
separate examinations for these.
Monday's order leaves Medical Council of India with the
onerous task of conducting the NEET at a short notice as
students have already filled in forms for several
judgment reviving the NEET
was pronounced in open court, stunned lawyers appearing
for private colleges, pleaded that the SC clarify the
consequences. The bench replied that “natural
consequence“ was that NEET comes into force. It said the
court would give a fresh hearing on constitutional
validity of NEET but in the meantime, the exam will be
restored. The lawyers then pleaded that the MCI's
notification to bring NEET back be stayed till its
validity was decided afresh and said that in 2013, too,
an interim stay was given. The bench, however, rejected
the plea saying the interim order was only for one
academic session and it could not continue.
“After giving our thoughtful and due
consideration, we are of the view that the judgment
delivered in Christian Medical College needs
reconsideration,“ the bench said.
Recalling earlier order the Constitution
bench allowed review petitions by the Union government
and the Medical Council of India (MCI) against the July
18, 2013, verdict and restored the NEET 2011
“The NEET regulations are restored and MCI can conduct
the examinations pending the fresh judgement,” the order
According to the 2011 notification, the
CBSE was to conduct the tests for admission to MBBS and
BDS courses and the National Board of Examination for
the PG programmes.
The 2013 verdict
The 2013 verdict had created a buzz in
the apex court corridors as an advocate had posted the
outcome on a social networking site in advance. However,
Justice Kabir had reportedly said he was not aware of
the leak of the judgment.
While Justice Vikramjit Sen (since retired) had shared
the views and findings of Justice Kabir against the
NEET, Justice Dave had in his dissenting verdict said
that the three judges "had no discussion on the subject
due to paucity of time". Justice Dave had stressed that
this was not the normal practice.
Justice Dave had written in 2013 that
“one of the main considerations of having one common
entrance test conducted by the Medical Council of India
is to check the malaise of money-making business in the
admission process by selling their seats for crores,
which has been going on for the last so many years in
The Christian Medical College, Vellore;
the States of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu; several
associations of private medical colleges; DD Medical
College and DD Hospital, Tamil Nadu; and various private
medical colleges had filed petitions in High Courts and
obtained an interim stay on the applicability of the
NEET on them. On the MCI’s petitions, these cases were
transferred to the Supreme Court.
No quota in PG admissions,
By Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI : On October 27, 2015 the Supreme Court directed
the Union government and all state government to
ensure that super-speciality medical admissions are kept
"unreserved, open and free" following complaints that
some southern states were allowing only domiciled MBBS doctors to
appear for PG medical entrance exams.
Delivering a 58-page judgment in
Dr. Sandeep and others versus Union of India and
others the bench of Justice
Dipak Misra and Justice P.C. Pant said that there should
be no reservation in post-graduate medical courses based
on caste, religion, residence or any other criteria.
The order came on a batch of petitions
challenging the domicile policy followed by Andhra
Pradesh and Telangana based on the Presidential order,
namely, Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions
(Regulations and Admissions) order of 1974 promulgated
under Article 371(D) of the Constitution which gave
special privileges of education and employment to the
local people of Andhra Pradesh.
The bench cited an earlier case -
Pradeep Jain versus the Union of India and others
- in which the top court had held in 1984 that
merit was the sole criterion when it came to super-speciality
medical admissions. But till date, it said, the
government has not framed any rules or guidelines to
implement the directive.
"In the Dr Pradeep Jain case this court... observed
that in super-specialities there should really be no
reservation. This is... for improving the standard of
higher education and thereby... the quality of available
medical services...," Justice Misra, who wrote the
"We hope and trust that the Government of India and
the state governments shall seriously consider this
aspect... without delay and appropriate guidelines shall
be evolved by the Indian Medical Council so as to keep
the super specialities... unreserved, open and free."
The petitioner doctors had complained that while in
most of India they are allowed to appear in entrance
exams of different states for courses like DM (Doctor of
Medicine) and MCh (Master of Chirurgiae), Andhra
Pradesh, Telangana and Tamil Nadu permitted only those
domiciled in these states.
This, they said, means that while candidates
domiciled in these states can sit for exams in other
states, students from other states are barred from
taking exams in these states.
The petitioners said this went against
constitutional provisions like Articles 14 (equality
before law) and 16 (equality of opportunity in public
employment, education, etc.).
The court asked the Andhra and Telangana authorities to
objectively assess the policy to see whether it does
justice to the aspirations of students and approach the
issue keeping national interest as paramount.
The petitions filed said how students from other States,
namely, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan,
Delhi, Karnataka, Kerala, West Bengal, Bihar and Haryana,
allow candidates from all over India to appear in the
It complained that States like Andhra Pradesh, Telangana
and Tamil Nadu confine the eligibility only to the
candidates having domicile in their respective States.
This judgment only deals with the two States of Andhra
and Telangana. The bench observed that it would consider
Tamil Nadu's case separately in a hearing scheduled for
November 4, 2015.
Supreme Court defends
MCI's PG admission rules
By Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI: On January 12, 2015 the Supreme Court upheld the
Medical Council of India's (MCI) postgraduate admission
regulations and quashed Kerala government's
decision to reserve seats for doctors working in its
hospitals and other departments.
The court said, in no uncertain terms,
that the admissions to the postgraduate medical courses
can be done only on the basis of merit of students
appearing in the common entrance examination.
The apex court division bench comprising
Justices T S Thakur and R Banumathi said
Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations of the
Medical Council of India, 2000 were
binding and state governments could not make any rule in
violation of the regulations.
The state, the apex court said, overstepped its
jurisdiction by making a law earmarking 40% of total
seats available to the state quota for its medical
officers who were to get admission on the basis of their
seniority, without appearing in the entrance
Delivering its judgement in
Sudhir N. & ors. versus State of
Kerala & ors.
on January 12 the
bench said : "Regulation 9 (of MCI) is, in our opinion, a complete
code by itself inasmuch as it prescribes the basis for
determining the eligibility of the candidates including
the method to be adopted for determining the inter se
merit which remains the only basis for such admissions.
To the performance in the entrance test can be added
weightage on account of rural service rendered by the
candidates in the manner and to the extent indicated,"
The court said the method, however, was given a go-by by
the impugned legislation when it provided that
in-service candidates seeking admission in the quota
shall be granted such admission not on the basis of one
of the methodologies but on the basis of seniority of
"When the maximum marks to be obtained in the entrance
test for admission to the institutions for higher
education including higher medical education are fixed,
the state cannot adversely affect the standards laid
down by the Union government. It was held that it is for
the MCI to determine reservation to be made for SC/ST
and OBC candidates and lowering the qualifying marks in
their favour," it said.
Upholding the order, the apex court, however, objected
to the observation made by the High Court in which it said that
seniority of in-service candidates should be considered
while preparing merit list.
"A meritorious in-service candidate cannot be denied
admission only because he has an eligible senior above
him though lower in merit. It is now fairly well settled
that merit and merit alone can be the basis of
admission. Their merit cannot be overlooked only to
promote seniority which has no place in the scheme of
MCI regulations," it said.