The Supreme Court has nudged the “authorities” to reconsider their stance on reservation in “super – speciality” and post graduate courses..In a judgment delivered yesterday, a Bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice PC Pant stated that the “privilege” of reservation is “competing with eternity” and that an objective assessment of the situation is required keeping the national interest in mind..The court was dealing with a challenge to domicile-based reservation in super specialty medical courses in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Tamil Nadu..Senior Advocates Indu Malhotra and BH Marlapalle appeared for the petitioners while Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi represented the Union government. Senior Advocate Harin P Raval and Advocate Udaya Kumar Sagar represented the State of Telangana while Advocate Guntur Prabhakar appeared for the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Medical Council of India was represented by advocate Gaurav Sharma..Admission to D.M. (Doctorate of Medicine) and M.Ch. (Masters of Chirurgiae) courses are based on super-specialty entrance examination conducted in different States in India. Unlike other states, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Tamil Nadu, confined the eligibility only to the candidates having domicile in their respective states..Andhra Pradesh and Telangana has put such a reservation in place by virtue of a Presidential order, namely, Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulations and Admissions) order of 1974 issued under Article 371-D of the Constitution and G.O.P. No.646 dated 10th July, 1979..In the end, the Court turned down the challenge to the said policy vis-a-vis Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, holding that,.“The undivided State of Andhra Pradesh enjoys a special privilege granted to it under Article 371-D of the Constitution and the Presidential Order.”.At the same time, the court also urged the government to reconsider the policy of reservation with respect to super speciality course..Relying on the case of Dr. Fazal Ghafoor v. Union of India & Ors., the Court stated that,.“It has been vehemently urged by Mr. Marlapalle that despite 27 years having been elapsed, the situation remains the same. We take note of the said submission and we are also inclined to echo the observation that was made in the case of Fazal Ghafoor (supra) wherein it has been stated thus:-.“In Dr Pradeep Jain case this Court has observed that in Super Specialities there should really be no reservation. This is so in the general interest of the country and for improving the standard of higher education and thereby improving the quality of available medical services to the people of India. We hope and trust that the Government of India and the State Governments shall seriously consider this aspect of the matter without delay and appropriate guidelines shall be evolved by the Indian medical Council so as to keep the Super Specialities in medical education unreserved, open and free.”.The fond hope has remained in the sphere of hope though there has been a progressive change. The said privilege remains unchanged, as if to compete with eternity. Therefore, we echo the same feeling and reiterate the aspirations of others so that authorities can objectively assess and approach the situation so that the national interest can become paramount. We do not intend to add anything in this regard.”.Although the petitions pertaining to the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana stand dismissed, the one involving Tamil Nadu will be heard separately from November 4 onwards.
The Supreme Court has nudged the “authorities” to reconsider their stance on reservation in “super – speciality” and post graduate courses..In a judgment delivered yesterday, a Bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice PC Pant stated that the “privilege” of reservation is “competing with eternity” and that an objective assessment of the situation is required keeping the national interest in mind..The court was dealing with a challenge to domicile-based reservation in super specialty medical courses in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Tamil Nadu..Senior Advocates Indu Malhotra and BH Marlapalle appeared for the petitioners while Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi represented the Union government. Senior Advocate Harin P Raval and Advocate Udaya Kumar Sagar represented the State of Telangana while Advocate Guntur Prabhakar appeared for the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Medical Council of India was represented by advocate Gaurav Sharma..Admission to D.M. (Doctorate of Medicine) and M.Ch. (Masters of Chirurgiae) courses are based on super-specialty entrance examination conducted in different States in India. Unlike other states, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Tamil Nadu, confined the eligibility only to the candidates having domicile in their respective states..Andhra Pradesh and Telangana has put such a reservation in place by virtue of a Presidential order, namely, Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulations and Admissions) order of 1974 issued under Article 371-D of the Constitution and G.O.P. No.646 dated 10th July, 1979..In the end, the Court turned down the challenge to the said policy vis-a-vis Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, holding that,.“The undivided State of Andhra Pradesh enjoys a special privilege granted to it under Article 371-D of the Constitution and the Presidential Order.”.At the same time, the court also urged the government to reconsider the policy of reservation with respect to super speciality course..Relying on the case of Dr. Fazal Ghafoor v. Union of India & Ors., the Court stated that,.“It has been vehemently urged by Mr. Marlapalle that despite 27 years having been elapsed, the situation remains the same. We take note of the said submission and we are also inclined to echo the observation that was made in the case of Fazal Ghafoor (supra) wherein it has been stated thus:-.“In Dr Pradeep Jain case this Court has observed that in Super Specialities there should really be no reservation. This is so in the general interest of the country and for improving the standard of higher education and thereby improving the quality of available medical services to the people of India. We hope and trust that the Government of India and the State Governments shall seriously consider this aspect of the matter without delay and appropriate guidelines shall be evolved by the Indian medical Council so as to keep the Super Specialities in medical education unreserved, open and free.”.The fond hope has remained in the sphere of hope though there has been a progressive change. The said privilege remains unchanged, as if to compete with eternity. Therefore, we echo the same feeling and reiterate the aspirations of others so that authorities can objectively assess and approach the situation so that the national interest can become paramount. We do not intend to add anything in this regard.”.Although the petitions pertaining to the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana stand dismissed, the one involving Tamil Nadu will be heard separately from November 4 onwards.
