Plea Challenging Admission Priority To Wards Of Ex-Servicemen Over Serving Defence Personnel In Professional Courses Withdrawn From J&K&L High Court

The development comes in view of withdrawal of the petition on account of a subsequent policy framed by the Ministry, in supersession of the impugned policy. The Petitioner, a medical aspirant, however obtained liberty from the Court to seek appropriate remedy available under law to call in question the new policy.

The Case

The petitioner is the daughter of a serving Lieutenant colonel. Her counsel contended that earlier, there was no prioritization within the 'Children of Defence Personnel' category, rather there was level playing field for merit for all CDP candidates. However, the impugned policy prescribed inter-se priority for reservation placing wards of Ex-servicemen at higher priority (no. VI) and wards of Serving Personnel at lower priority (no. VIII), thus placing the wards of serving personnel at a disadvantageous position.

Alleging violation of the principles of equality provided under Article 14 of the Constitution and also against the spirit and motive force for providing reservation/preference to the wards of the Serving personnel in Armed Forces, the petitioner prayed for quashing the policy to this extent.

Previously, the High Court vide order dated 18.04.2022 had stayed the impugned communication to the extent it pertained to the priority amongst the wards of Serving Personnel and Ex-servicemen without prejudice to the ongoing selection process.

Feeling aggrieved of the interim directions, a NEET-PG aspirant had moved the High Court seeking vacation of the stay. He submitted that one seat of MD/MS in CDP category is blocked for the reason that the matter is sub-judice. However, he contended that being priority one CDP candidate has a vested right in the said seat.

J&K Board of Professional Entrance Examination (BOPEE) also supported the applicant, stating that it would not be in a position to fill any seat beyond the prescribed cut off date and any unfilled seat will get wasted.

In is at this juncture that Deputy Solicitor General of lndia submitted that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous in light of the fact that it challenges policy dated 30.11.2017, which has been superseded by the subsequent policy dated 21.05.2018 with the approval of the Defence Minister.

In light of the aforesaid development, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal dismissed the petition as withdrawn with liberty. Further, with a view to protect the interest of the petitioner, it ordered,

"one seat in MBBS Course for the current session under NEET be kept reserved for the petitioner for two weeks from today or till the petitioner files a fresh writ petition as prayed for challenging the fresh policy issued by the Ministry of Defence Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare dated 21.05.2018, whichever is earlier and the continuance/extension of the interim order insofar as reserving one seat in MBBS under CDP category will be subject to the further orders, if any, passed by this Court."

Case Title : Saanvi Andotra Vs Union of India & Ors.