DR. SANDEEP S/O SADASHIVRAO KANSURKAR AND OTHERS versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2015] 14 S.C.R. 328 · Decided: 27-10-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 14 S.C.R. 328 , 
.A 
DR. SANDEEP S/O SADASHIVRAO KANSURKAR 
B 
AND OTHERS 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 444 of 2015) 
OCTOBER 27, 2015 
[DIPAK MISRA AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.] 
c 
. Education!EducationaL Institutions - Admission -
Super-specialty courses - Reservation based on residence 
or institutional preference - Challenge to, on ground that it is 
absolutely against thf/I national interest and plays foul of 
equality clause engrafted in the Constitution - Plea of writ 
D petitioners that reservations made by the States of Andhra 
Pradesh and Telangana ushers in a state of inequality by 
putting the residents of the said States in one class solely on 
the foundation of domicile and others in a different category 
altogether without any rationale and, therefore, the entire 
E action smacks of arbitrariness and unreasonableness -
States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, however, drew 
support from the Presidential order, namely, Andhra 
Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulations and 
Admissions) order 1974 issued under Article 371-D of the 
F Constitution and G.O.P. No.646 dated 101• July, 1979 issued 
by the State of Andhra Pradesh - Their contention that the 
claim of the petitioners to appear in the entrance test 
conducted for admission into the medical super-specialty 
courses was contrary to the scheme of the Presidential Order 
G and the 1979 circular- Submission made by the petitioners 
that though Article 371-D of the Constitution of India makes 
special provisions for the State, yet that would not extend to 
cover reservations as regards the super-specialty courses 
where merit alone matters - Plea of petitioners that there. 
H 
328 
. DR. SANDEEP S/O SADASHIVRAO KANSURKAR v. 
329 
UNION OF INDIA 
cannot be reservation of any kind in respect of post.-graduate A 
or super speciality courses - It was urged that the State of 
Andhra Pradesh and Telangana cannot apply the domicile 
test only to admit its own students and that too also in respect 
of 15% quota meant for non-local candidates - Held: The 
undivided State of Andhra Pradesh enjoys a special privilege 
B 
granted to it underArticle 371-D of the Constitution and the 
Presidential Order - A scheme has been laid down in the 
case of Dr. Pradeep Jain and the concept of percentage had 
undergone certain changes ...: In Reita Nirankari, the same 
three-Judge Bench clarified the position - However, in C. C 
Surekha, the Court had expressed its view about the 
amendment of the Presidential Order regard being had to 
the passage of time and the advancement in the State of 
Andhra Pradesh - A hopeful observation was made in the 
case of Fazal Ghafoor that the Government of India and the D 
State Governments shall seriously consider this aspect of 
the matter without delay and appropriate guidelines shall be 
evolved by the Indian Medical Council so as to keep the 
Super Specialities in medical education unreserved, open 
and free -
The fond hope has remained in the sphere of E 
hope though there has been a progressive change - The 
·said privilege remains unchanged, as if to compete with 
eternity- Therefore, this Court echoes the same feeling and 
reiterates the aspirations of others so that authorities can 
objectively assess and approach the situation so that the F 
national interest can become paramount - This Court does 
not intend to add anything in this regard- Consequently, the 
writ petition as far as it pertains to the State of Andhra Pradesh 
and Telangana, is dismissed . 
• Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Another vs. State of M.P. 
· G 
and Others (1999) 7SCC120: 1999 (1) Suppl. 
SCR 249; Nikhil Himthani vs. State of Uttarakhand 
(2013) 10 sec 237: 2013 (14) SCR 23; Vishal 
Goel vs. State of Karnataka (2014) 11 SCC 456; 
H 
330 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 14S.C.R. 
Saurabh Chaudri vs. Union of India (2003) 11 
SCC 146: 2003 (5) Suppl. SCR 152; Dr. Pradeep 
Jain and Others vs. Union of India and Others 
(1984) 3 sec 654 : 1984 (3) SCR 942; Reita 
Nirankari vs. Union of India (1984) 3 SCC 706; 
Dr. Dinesh Kumar vs. Motilaf Nehru Medical 
College (1986) 3 sec 121: 1986 (3) SCR 345; 
C. Surekha vs. Union of India (1988) 4 SCC 526: 
Dr. Fazal Ghafoor vs. Union of India and Others 
(1988) Supp SCC 794: Chief Justice of A.P. vs. 
L. \I.A. Dixitulu (1979) 2 SCC 34: 1979 (1) SCR 
26; N. Vasundara v. State of Mysore (1971) 2 SCC 
22; Jagdish Saran v. Union of India (1980) 2 SCC 
768 : 1980 (2) SCR
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.