No pooling of PG Medical Seats of Delhi University and IP university : Delhi HC
New Delhi: Rejecting the interim relief to medical aspirants who demanded the pooling of seats of Delhi and IP universities while counseling for PG medical admissions in the capital, the Delhi High court refused to interfere with the admission process for postgraduate medical courses in Delhi University and Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University for the academic year 2017-18. Giving a go ahead to both universities to continue admissions the single bench comprising of Justice V. Kameswar Rao observed
The court was responding to writ petition demanding pooling of seats of DU and IP as well as common counselling for PG medical seats for the same in the capital. The petitioners also challenged University rules and regulations which provide for institutional preference while admitting students. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out that as against 150 seats at the Under Graduate level in the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, respondent No.1 there are about 209 seats at the Post Graduate level which means if institutional preference is given, many seats would remain unfilled/go waste
The writ also called for a combined counselling through the designated authority for admission to all PG/Medical Courses in terms of Regulation 9A of the Medical Council of India Post Graduate Regulations, 2000 in the capital as well as pooling of seats adding that the word “Common Counselling” in Regulation 9A has to include pooling of students without any institutional preference and this necessarily be understood in the background of the fact that the admission process is on the basis of NEET-PG.
On the other hand, Mr. T. Singhdev, learned counsel for the Medical Council of India, the respondent submited that the institution reservation is permissible under the scheme of Regulation 9 and Regulation 9A of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulation, 2000.
The counsel for MCI further added that merger of seats of University of Delhi and Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University is impractical as both follow different lists for reserved categories (SC/ST and OBC) and this Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot merge the seats reserved by way of institutional preference of the two Universities one being Central University and other a State University as that would amount to encroaching the functions assigned to legislative bodies under the Constitution.
Following the arguments court denied the students interim relief, and refusing to interfere in the process of medical admissions in the capital.
You can read the full judgement below
In any case, prima facie when Universities are governed by two different reservation policies, they cannot pool their seats for common counselling. It would lead to further litigation by candidates, who are entitled to admission in view of one list, say Central List but denied the same as his/her caste does not find mentioned in the UT list.
The court was responding to writ petition demanding pooling of seats of DU and IP as well as common counselling for PG medical seats for the same in the capital. The petitioners also challenged University rules and regulations which provide for institutional preference while admitting students. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out that as against 150 seats at the Under Graduate level in the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, respondent No.1 there are about 209 seats at the Post Graduate level which means if institutional preference is given, many seats would remain unfilled/go waste
The writ also called for a combined counselling through the designated authority for admission to all PG/Medical Courses in terms of Regulation 9A of the Medical Council of India Post Graduate Regulations, 2000 in the capital as well as pooling of seats adding that the word “Common Counselling” in Regulation 9A has to include pooling of students without any institutional preference and this necessarily be understood in the background of the fact that the admission process is on the basis of NEET-PG.
On the other hand, Mr. T. Singhdev, learned counsel for the Medical Council of India, the respondent submited that the institution reservation is permissible under the scheme of Regulation 9 and Regulation 9A of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulation, 2000.
The counsel for MCI further added that merger of seats of University of Delhi and Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University is impractical as both follow different lists for reserved categories (SC/ST and OBC) and this Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot merge the seats reserved by way of institutional preference of the two Universities one being Central University and other a State University as that would amount to encroaching the functions assigned to legislative bodies under the Constitution.
Following the arguments court denied the students interim relief, and refusing to interfere in the process of medical admissions in the capital.
You can read the full judgement below
Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .
Disclaimer: This site is primarily intended for healthcare professionals. Any content/information on this website does not replace the advice of medical and/or health professionals and should not be construed as medical/diagnostic advice/endorsement or prescription. Use of this site is subject to our terms of use, privacy policy, advertisement policy. © 2020 Minerva Medical Treatment Pvt Ltd