SUPREET BATRA AND ORS. versus UNION OF INOIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] 1 S.C.R. 586 · Decided: 27-01-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · 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)

A 
SUPREET BATRA AND ORS. 
v. 
UNION OF INOIA AND 'ORS. 
JANUARY 27, 2003 
B 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU, D.M. DHARMADHIKARI AND 
G.P. MATHUR, JJ;] 
Educatiorr 
C 
. MBBSIBDS courses-Admission t~Under I 5% All India quota-Scheme 
ft:(lmed inShrawan Kumar's case {ls modified later-Some States reported 
to htive not done counselling by prescribed dates~Wrii petitions filed seeking 
. :Jurther modification of the Sche.me With a provision for third round of 
counselling-Held, the deiai!edSchemejramed by the Court has to be worked 
D out as indicated therein-:-There is no scope for third round of counselling 
u~er the Scheme which need not be altered 
In Shrawan Kumar's case the Supreme Court framed a Scheme for 
admission to MBBS/BDS courses under tSo/o ·All-India quota in various 
Colleges in the country. The Scheme was modified by an order made in 
E I.A.No.JO of 2000 in W.P.(C) No. 443 of 1992. whereunder last date of 
receipf of vacancy position was fixed as 15th .July. of each year and second 
round counselling was proposed to be taken .between 18th July to 24th 
July each year. 
Some of the candidates filed writ petitions stating that counselling 
F was not dorie in some of the States by the dates prescribed in the Scheme 
and, therefore~ they would not be able to take advantage of the second 
round of counselling. It was submitted that some of the candidates, who 
were allotted seats in the first round, may not .have been given the course 
or College or place of their choice and later when they get allotment of 
G t'1eir choice under State quota they would vacate the seat allotted to them 
under All-India quota and thus more seats would fall vacant under the 
All India quota. It was, therefore, contended that a third round of 
counselling may be permitted so that the seats thus falling vacant can be 
aliotted to candidates under All-India quota and may not be allowed to 
revert back to the States. 
H 
586 
,.. . 
SUPREET BATRA v. U.0.1. 
587 
Dismissing the petitions, the Court 
A 
HELD: t.l. When detailed Scheme has been framed through orders 
of the Court prescribing also the manner in which it has to be worked 
out, if in a particular year there in any short fall or certain number of 
seats are not filled up, the same would not be done by adopting one more 
round of counselling because there In no scope for a third round of B 
counselling under the Scheme. It would not be advisable to go on altering 
the scheme as and when seats are vacant. What is to be borne in mind is 
that broad equality is to be achieved and not that it should result in any 
mathematical exactitude. (591-B, Cl 
Sharwan Kumar etc. etc. v. Director General, Health Sciences and Anr. C 
etc. etc. (1993] 3 sec 332, explained. 
1.2. The primary consideration in formulating the Scheme for 
creating a reservation in favour of candidates is broadly based on national 
approach as against the State based reservation. This background resulted D 
in the formulation of the Scheme. The Sche.mes framed by this Court 
should not be read as if they are Statutes or that inexorable rights are 
conferred upon the parties. The object of the Scheme was to achieve a 
broad based equality and as such the Scheme need not be altered. Besides, 
there is no scope for admitting students midstream as that would be against 
the very spirit of statutes governing medical education. [590-C, D; 591-E, Fl E 
Dr. Pradeep Jain and Ors. etc. etc. v. Union of India and Ors., etc. etc., 
(1984] 3 SCC 654 and Dr. Dinesh Kumar & Ors. v. Moti/al Nehru Medical 
College and Ors., [1986[ 3 SCC 727; Ms. Neelu Arora and Anr. v. Union of 
India and Ors. and Medical Council of India v. Madhu Singh and Ors., (2002]. 
7 sec 258, relied on. 
F 
2. By an interim order this Court had directed that the seats under 
the All-India quota should not revert to the States. As a consequence, these 
seats have not been filled up either under All-India quota or State quota. 
However, with the dismissal of these petitions, the interim order gets G 
dissolved. In I.A.No 13 filed in W.P. (Civil) No. 393 of 2002, it has been 
stated that the State of Kerala had extended period of Rank List upto 
December 31, 2002 only and thereafter applicants would lose their 
eligibility. It is made clear that period of validity shall stand extended until 
the appropriate steps are taken by the authorities concerned in that State. 
(591-G, H; 592-A] H 
588 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2003] I S.C.R. 
A 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Wri
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.