LexNIKHIL HIMTHANI versus STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2013) 14 S.C.R. 23 NIKHIL HIMTHANI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 379 of 2013 etc.) AUGUST 06, 2013 [A.K. PATNAIK AND FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA. JJ.] A B Education/Educational Institution - Admission - Medical college - Post graduate course - Information Bulletin issued C by State providing eligibility for admission in post-graduate course in medical colleges of the State - Bullettin providing preference to the candidates on the basis of domicile for admission to the courses - Writ Petition challenging the Information Bulletin - Held: Giving preference to the D candidates for admission to Post-graduate Courses in the Medical Colleges of the State, on the basis of domicile within the .State is violative or Art. 14 of the Constitution - Hence the eligibility criteria quashed and the Information Bulletin declared void. E F The petitioner got admission in the MBBS Course in the Medical College at Haldwani in the State of Uttarakhand. However, his admission in the MBBS Course was not through Uttarakhand State PMT. Having c:ompleted the course, the petitioner appeared in NEET Examination 2013 for admission to post-graduate medical t;ourses, wherein he secured 60th rank of the State of llJttarakhand. Government of Uttarakhand published 'Information Bulletin for counselling for Uttarakhand through NEET. In the Information Bulletin, the eligibility G criteria specified in Clause 1 excluded institutional preference to ~he candidate who had got admission in the MBBS Course in the State Medical Colleges not 23 H 24 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 14 S.C.R. A through State PMT; and Clause 2 and 3 provided eligibility criteria to the candidates who were domicile of State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner filed the present petition for quashing 8 Clauses 1, 2 and 3 of the Eligibility Criteria in the Information Bulletin on the ground that the clauses are discriminatory and violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. Allowing the petition, the Court c HELD: 1. Giving institutional preference is a matter of State Policy which can be invalidated only in the event of it being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. merit must be the test for selecting candidates, particularly in the higher levels of education like post-graduate medical 0 courses, such as MD. Excellence cannot be compromised by any other consideration for the purpose of admission to post-graduate medical courses such as MD/MS and the like because that would be detrimental to the interests of the nation and therefore reservation based on E residential requirement in the State will affect the right to equality of opportunity under Article 14 of the Constitution. (Paras 10 to 12] (32-G-H; 33-B-C, G-H] 2. In the present case, under clause 5 of the Eligibility Criteria, merit as determined through NEET is the basis F for admission to the post-graduate medical courses. But as per clause 1 of the Eligibility Criteria, the candidates who have passed MBBS examination from different colleges in the State of Uttarakhand are eligible for admission to the medical post-graduate courses in the G State quota only if they were admitted through the Uttarakhand State PMT. The petitioner, who has studied the MBBS Course in the Government Medical College at Haldwani in the State of Uttarakhand was not admitted to the aforesaid course through the Uttarakhand State H PMT examination. The Medical College at Haldwani was NIKHIL HIMTHANI v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND 25 not a Government College in 2007 and therefore in the A Medical College at Haldwani, there was no All India Quota at that time. The fact however remains that the petitioner had the merit to be admitted in MBBS Course in 2007 when he was actually admitted in the Medical College at Haldwani. Therefore, to exclude the petitioner from B consideration on the basis of his merit only on the ground that he was not admitted to the MBBS course through the Uttarakhand PMT would be to deny him equality of opportunity in matter of admission to the post-graduate medical course and to violate his right to equality under c Article 14 of the Constitution. [Para 13] [34-E-H; 35-A-C] Dr. Pradeep Jain and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors .. (1984) 3 sec 654: 1984 (3) SCR 942 - relied on. 3. A candidate who is not a domicile of Uttarakhand D State is not eligible for admission to post-graduate course under clauses 2 and 3 of the El
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.