Admission to Super Specialty Medical Courses shall proceed without providing reservations: SC [Academic year 2020-2021]
We direct that the counselling for admission to Super Specialty Medical Courses for the academic year 2020-2021 shall proceed on a date to be fixed by the competent authority without providing for reservations to in-service doctors for the academic year 2020-2021. We reiterate that the above direction would be operative only for the current academic year i.e. 2020-2021. (Para 16)
Dr. Prerit Sharma & Ors. v. Dr. Bilu B.S. & Ors.
Civil Appeal No.3840 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.12891 of 2020) with Writ Petition (C) No.1299 of 2020, Civil Appeal Nos. 3841-3843 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.13670-13672 of 2020)
Decided on 27.11.2020
Counsel for the Appellants: Mr. Dushyant Dave, Mr. Shyam Divan
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. P.Wilson, Mr.George Varghese Perumpallikuttiyil
Other Counsels involved in the case: Mr. Vikas Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the National Medical Commission, Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India, Mr. Jaideep Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for the State of Kerala, Mr. C.S. Vaidhyanathan and Mr. V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice L. Nageswara Rao, Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Ajay Rastogi decided the present case.
The Respondent filed Writ Petition No.20256 of 2020 in the appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.12891 of 2020 in the Kerala High Court seeking implementation of reservation to 40% of seats in Super Specialty Medical Courses for in-service doctors in accordance with the law laid down by this Court in in Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association v. Union of India, (2020) SCC Online P. 699. By order dated 05.10.2020, the High Court refused to grant stay of counseling to the 40% seats for in-service quota. Aggrieved by this, the Respondent filed the Writ Appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala, which was allowed by an order dated 07.10.2020, and thereby directed the preparation of a list of candidates eligible for admission as in-service candidates, which would be sent to the Directorate of Medical Education, New Delhi on 08.10.2020. The Director General, Health Services was directed to consider the candidates for admission in Super Specialty Medical Courses in the State of Kerala under this quota.
The said order dated 07.10.2020 is challenged by the Petitioners; notice was issued by this Court on 27.10.2020 in the SLP filed against the order dated 07.10.2020 passed by the High Court of Kerala and on the statement made by Mr. Dushyant Dave, learned Senior Counsel, that the National Medical Commission on 08.10.2020 decided to postpone the counseling, and an order of status quo was passed and the matter was directed to be listed for hearing on 27.11.2020.
A Writ Petition was filed in the Madras High Court by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.13670-13672 of 2020 seeking a direction to notify 50% vacancies for in-service Doctors for admission to Super Specialty Medical Courses for the academic year 2020-2021 in Tamil Nadu. The Writ Petition was disposed by the High Court, holding that the relief sought for in the Petition has already been granted by the State Government by passing the GOMS No.462 dated 07.11.2020. The said order dated 09.11.2020 is challenged before this Court in the appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.12891 of 2020. Writ Petition (C) No. 1299 of 2020 is filed by six doctors who are eligible for admission to those Courses, seeking a direction to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for conducting the counseling and admission to the Courses as per the information bulletin and not to grant any reservation to in-service doctors.
The affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Kerala was brought to the notice of the Court, by learned Counsel Mr. Dushyant Dave, wherein it was stated that the information bulletin for admission to Super Specialty Medical Courses had already been issued in which no reservation was provided for in-service candidates, hence it was practically impossible to implement new reservation norms for the academic year 2020-2021. Further, he submitted that the admissions should be completed without any reservation to the in-service doctors and larger questions contained in the appeal can be dealt with later.
The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Kerala, Mr. Jaideep Gupta, stated that since the admission process has commenced already, it poses a difficulty to implement the reservation. However, he stated that the legislation made by the State providing for reservation to in-service doctors has been upheld by this Court and the State has the power to provide reservation to in service Doctors in super specialties. Mr. George Varghese Perumpallikuttiyil supported the order of the High Court and argued that the Kerala Medical Officers Admission to PG Courses under Service Quota Act, 2008 and the Rules provided for a service quota to in-service doctors for admission to the same. Responding to the submission of Counsel on behalf of State of Kerala, he argued that administrative inconvenience cannot be a ground to interfere with the order passed by the High Court directing implementation of reservation. Further, he stated that this Court should not interfere with the order passed by the High Court as it would result in immense loss to the in-service doctors in the State of Kerala.
Mr. Dushyant Dave and Mr. Shyam Divan, learned Senior Counsel contended that the judgment in Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association v. Union of India, (2020) SCC Online P. 699, does not deal with the admissions to Super Specialty Medical Courses and anyhow, the judgment would operate prospectively. It was argued by them that the information bulletin for admission to Super Specialty Courses for the academic year 2020-2021 was issued on 03.08.2020 and results for the NEET Super Specialty Examination were declared on 25.09.2020. Counselling was scheduled to commence on 08.10.2020 and it was made clear to the candidates that there shall be no reservation. They stated that no reservation can be provided for this academic as the procedure for selections for admission to Super Specialty Medical Courses commenced a long time back.
The learned Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Sanjay Jain, supported the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioners that it has been clearly laid down by this Court that there can be no reservation in Super Specialty Courses. He submitted that there is no compelling material on the basis of which reservation was provided to in-service doctors by the Government order dated 07.11.2020. One of the directions given in GOMS No.462 dated 07.11.2020 is to post the in-service candidates in hospitals in rural or remote or difficult areas which, according to Mr. Vikas Singh, learned Senior Counsel for National Medical Commission is not a valid reason for providing reservation to them.
Mr. C.S. Vaidhyanathan and Mr. V. Giri, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu, stated that it has been clearly laid down by this Court that the States have the power to provide reservation for in-service candidates in PG courses. It was submitted by them that there are 369 seats in Super Specialty Medical Courses in the State of Tamil Nadu and that around 70% of the Doctors who are trained in these Courses do not serve in the State of Tamil Nadu, but the in-service doctors have an obligation to serve the State of Tamil Nadu till the date of their retirement. Further, the learned Senior Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu submitted that as the admissions for the year 2020-2021 have not been completed, the said judgment has to be implemented for admissions in said year; as it is well settled law that reservation can be provided by an executive order taking into account the needs of the State, GOMS No.462 dated 07.11.2020 is valid.
Mr. P. Wilson, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondent argued this Court in K. Duraisamy and another v. State of T.N: (2001) 2 SCC 538, held that reservation is permissible in Super Specialty Medical Courses and submitted that the prospectus itself is contrary to the earlier judgments of this Court. Further, he stated that even without following, the judgment of this Court in Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association v. Union of India (supra), it was necessary for the National Medical Commission and the Union of India to implement the law laid down by this Court by providing for reservation for in-service doctors in Super Specialty Medical Courses.
The Court rejected the submission of Mr. Vaidyanathan and Mr. Giri that nobody will be prejudiced if the Government Order is given effect and stated:
There will be reduction of 50% of seats in Super Specialty courses in Tamil Nadu if the Government Order is carried out, which is detrimental to their chances of admission. Admittedly no reservation for in-service Doctors was implemented since 2016. As the admission process is at the final stages, we cannot permit reservation for in-service Doctors for this year. (Para 15)
The Court held:
We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the validity of GOMS No.462 of 07.11.2020.We direct that the counselling for admission to Super Specialty Medical Courses for the academic year 2020-2021 shall proceed on a date to be fixed by the competent authority without providing for reservations to in-service doctors for the academic year 2020-2021. We reiterate that the above direction would be operative only for the current academic year i.e. 2020-2021. (Para 16)
The Court listed the appeals and the Writ Petition for hearing in February of 2021.
View/Download Judgment: Dr. Prerit Sharma & Ors. v. Dr. Bilu B.S. & Ors.
Jhanavi M
