"Institutional Preference" In PG Medical Courses Permissible Even After Introduction Of NEET: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court has observed that "Institutional Preference" in the Post Graduate Medical Courses is permissible even after the introduction of the NEET Scheme.

The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra, Justice MR Shah and Justice BR Gavai observed that the Institutional Preference to the extent of 50% has been approved by the Supreme Court in various judgments.

The issue considered in Yatinkumar Jasubhai Patel vs. State of Gujarat was whether after the introduction of the NEET Scheme, still the "Institutional Preference" in the Post Graduate Medical Courses would be permissible? The contention raised in the case was that, in view of the introduction of the NEET Scheme and in view of Section 10D of the Medical Council of India Act, by which admissions are to be given on the basis of the merit in the NEET, such an "Institutional Preference" would not be permissible. In this case, "Institutional Preference" – giving preference to the candidates graduating from Gujarat University was challenged.

The Court noted that right from 1971 onwards till 2017, consistently the Supreme Court has approved and/or permitted the "Institutional Preference" in the Post Graduate Medical Courses. It further held that the introduction of the NEET has, as such, nothing to do with any preference/Institutional Preference, more particularly the "Institutional Preference". The purpose and object of the introduction of the NEET was to conduct a uniform entrance examination for all medical educational institutions at the under-graduate level or postgraduate level and admissions at the under-graduate level and post-graduate level are to be given solely on the basis of the merits and/or marks obtained in the NEET examination only, the bench added.

It was further held that a regulation providing 50% Institutional Preference/Reservation shall not be in any way ultra vires to Section 10D of the MCI Act. Following are relevant observations made in the judgment:

NEET has nothing to do with Institutional Preference

It is required to be noted that introduction of the NEET has, as such, nothing to do with any preference/Institutional Preference, more particularly the "Institutional Preference" as approved by this Court time and again. The purpose and object of the introduction of the NEET was to conduct a uniform entrance examination for all medical educational institutions at the under¬graduate level or postgraduate level and admissions at the under¬graduate level and post-graduate level are to be given solely on the basis of the merits and/or marks obtained in the NEET examination only. It is required to be noted that earlier the respective universities including the Gujarat University used to hold examination for post-graduate admission to medical courses and now instead of such tests by the Gujarat University/concerned universities, merit is to be determined on the basis of the NEET examination results only and admissions are required to be given on the basis of such merits or marks obtained in NEET. The only obligation by virtue of introduction of NEET is that even while giving admissions in the State quota/institutional reservation quota, still the admissions are required to be given on the basis of the merits determined on the basis of the NEET examination results.

Under the circumstances, introduction of the NEET Scheme, as such, has nothing to do with the "Institutional Preference". Therefore, the change by introduction of the NEET Scheme shall not affect the Institutional Preference/Reservation as approved by this Court from time to time in catena of decisions, more particularly the decisions referred to hereinabove. Under the guise of introduction of the NEET Scheme, the petitioners cannot be permitted to re-agitate and/or re-open the issue with respect to Institutional Preference which has been approved and settled by this Court in catena of decisions, more particularly the decisions referred to hereinabove. 

The bench referred to these judgments which have upheld institutional preference policy: Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India 1984 (3) SCC 654; Saurabh Chaudri v. Union of India 2003 (11) SCC 146; D.N. Chanchala v. State of Mysore (1971) 2 SCC 293; Gujarat University v. Rajiv Gopinath Bhatt (1996) 4 SCC 60. 

Click here to Read/Download Judgment