SC Adopts Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Criteria To Fill Up NRI Quota In Deemed Universities [Read Order]

The Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipak Misra, Kurian Joseph and Amitava Roy, on Tuesday, August 22, adopted the principles set out by the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Division Bench in Anshul Tomar v State of Madhya Pradesh and Others (2008), for admissions under NRI quota in medical colleges.

In the Consortium of Deemed Universities In Karnataka (CODEUNIK) & Anr v Union of India, heard by the bench, senior counsel for petitioners, Rajeev Dhawan, pointed out that the description of NRI has become extremely difficult following the circulars issued by the Directorate General of Health Services.

The issue before the court was how to fill up the 15 per cent quota for NRIs in the medical colleges, and the meaning to be given to the word “ward” in P.A. Inamdar v State of Maharashtra (2005) delivered by the Supreme Court, when the Court held that the NRI quota should be utilized bona fide by the NRIs only and for their children or wards.  The Court had suggested legislation or regularization to prevent misutilisation of such quota or any malpractice referable to NRI quota seats.

Since such a legislation/regularization has not been attempted, the Supreme Court found merit in the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s criteria for the purpose.  The High Court in Anshul Tomar, was inclined to give a broader meaning, as suggested by a Supreme Court bench earlier.   Applying the broader meaning, the High Court had upheld the admission of the petitioners under the NRI quota in that case as valid.

After the Centre gave its nod, the Supreme Court bench decided to adopt the principles set out in Anshul Tomar for the purpose of filling up of the 15 per cent NRI  quota in the deemed universities.

MP High Court Guidelines

1) If the mother or father of student is NRI and residing abroad ordinarily, then, either of the situations so held will be considered to be proper.
2) If the first degree relation of the student is NRI and residing abroad ordinarily, then in such circumstances also, qua this year, should be considered eligible. It is natural that such definition would include the real brother and sister over and above the mother-father of the first degree relation.
3) As per the definition revised by the Hon'ble Apex Court, interpretation of clause 3 thereof as not made limited but if made in a broad perspective, then, it is clear that the person who wanted to consider such student as ward (Palya), then, he be considered to be proper subject to compliance of the following conditions :
a) He should be the nearest relation.
b) In the definition of the nearest relation, committee has considered following relative having blood relations.
i) Real brother and sister of father i.e. real uncle and real aunt.
ii) Real brother and sister of mother i.e. real maternal uncle and maternal aunt.
iii) Father and mother of father i.e. grand father and grand mother.
iv) Father and mother of mother i.e. maternal grand father and maternal grand mother.
v) First degree-paternal and maternal cousins.
vi) Such person should be NRI.

c) Such persons should ordinarily be residing abroad.
d) Such person should have looked after such student as the guardian of the student and evidence to that effect must have been produced before the committee by such person.
e) There should be affidavit with aforesaid fact.

Read the Order Here