DIVJOT SEKHON versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Citation: [2026] 1 S.C.R. 372 · Decided: 06-01-2026 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KUMAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2026] 1 S.C.R. 372 : 2026 INSC 26
Divjot Sekhon 
v. 
State of Punjab and Others
(Civil Appeal No. 67 of 2026)
06 January 2026
[Sanjay Kumar* and Alok Aradhe, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
As regards admission to MBBS/BDS courses under sports quota, 
the issue arose as to whether the procedure of keeping the 
admission process elastic after issuance of the prospectus and 
submission of applications by the candidates with their sports 
achievements would be valid in the eye of law.
Headnotes†
Education/Educational Institution – Admission to MBBS/
BDS courses through NEET-UG under sports quota during 
session-2024 – Change in policy w.r.t the zone of consideration 
midstream during the admission process – Impermissibility – 
Prospectus for admission to the colleges in Punjab in 
undergraduate medical courses, including MBBS/BDS courses, 
during session-2024 was released by the University providing 
that credit would be given only for sports achievements during 
Classes XI and XII – However, later the impugned email and 
an Addendum affirming it was issued asking the candidates to 
submit their sports certificates in relation to their achievements 
during any class/year instead of just Classes XI and XII – In 
the merit list, respondent Nos.4 (‘KK’) and 5 were placed 
higher than the appellants on the strength of their sports 
achievements in Classes IX and X – Writ petitions filed by 
appellants, dismissed by High Court – Challenge to:
Held: Rules of the game cannot be altered once the game has 
begun – Just as modification of recruitment norms is forbidden in 
law after the recruitment process has begun, it is equally illegal 
for an admission process to not be fully defined in all its contours 
* Author
[2026] 1 S.C.R. 
373
Divjot Sekhon v. State of Punjab and Others
before its commencement, so as to leave room for the authorities 
to stipulate norms later on to suit their own interests or to permit 
nepotism – The transparency of such a process is paramount to 
ensure fairness and prevent arbitrariness – The admission process 
to MBBS/BDS courses during session-2024, by altering the zone 
of consideration for sports quota at the behest of one ‘RKK’, a 
Roller-Skating Coach was vitiated as he failed to disclose that 
his recommendation benefitted his own daughter ‘KK’-respondent 
No.4 – Further, when the State specifically noted in its Corrigendum 
in 2023 that enlargement of the zone of consideration to include 
Classes IX and X was only for session-2023 in view of the pandemic, 
the departure from the policy of limiting consideration to only sports 
achievements during Classes XI and XII, which was the policy 
obtaining prior thereto, ought not to have been effected midstream 
after applications were submitted by the candidates along with 
their sports achievements – State and its instrumentalities have 
a duty and responsibility to act fairly and reasonably in terms of 
the mandate of Art.14 – Any decision taken by the State must be 
reasoned and not arbitrary – Procedure followed by the State of 
Punjab in leaving the norms elastic, without disclosing as to what 
would be the exact policy w.r.t the zone of consideration, and 
allowing itself sufficient leeway to change such policy midstream 
during the admission process is not fair, transparent and enables 
arbitrariness and nepotism – Modification in the policy quashed – 
Appellants to be accommodated in the seats in the government 
medical college(s) allotted to respondent Nos.4 and 5, who in turn 
shall be given the seats vacated by the Appellants in the private 
medical college – Constitution of India – Art.14. [Paras 18, 21, 33, 
35, 38]
Education/Educational Institution – Admission to MBBS/
BDS courses through NEET UG under sports quota during 
session-2025 – Change in policy w.r.t the zone of consideration 
midstream during the admission process – Such modification 
of the policy during session-2024 was continued during 
session-2025 – Challenge to:
Held: Modification of the policy during session-2024 was vitiated – 
Continuation of that policy during session-2025 with nothing further 
would also be open to challenge on the same ground – However, 
since admissions have already been made for session-2025 and 
374
[2026] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
no candidate who would be adversely affected by interference 
therewith was made a party to this litigation – Therefore, this lis 
cannot be given a quietus at this stage – These appellants are 
granted libert

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.