Full Judgment Text
Non -Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1393 of 2019
[ Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 766 of 2019 ]
Association of Managements of Homeopathic
Medical Colleges of Maharashtra .... Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ….Respondents
W I T H
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1395 of 2019
[ Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 767 of 2019 ]
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1394 of 2019
[ Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 158 of 2019 ]
J U D G M E N T
L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.
Leave granted.
1. The Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha,
th
Homoeopathy (AYUSH), Government of India by letters dated 12
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
VISHAL ANAND
Date: 2019.02.01
15:55:30 IST
Reason:
th
February, 2018 and 5 June, 2018 instructed all the State Governments
and the concerned universities to admit students in AYUSH under-
1
graduate courses on the basis of the in NEET merit list for the
th
academic year 2018-19. By a letter dated 11 June, 2018, the
Government of India informed the State Governments that a candidate
seeking admission to AYUSH under-graduate courses shall obtain
th
minimum of marks at 50 percentile in NEET. Pursuant thereto,
th
Respondent No.3 by a notice dated 15 June, 2018 informed all the
candidates about the changed eligibility criteria, namely, the
th
introduction of the requirement of 50 percentile for open category
th
and 40 percentile for reserved category. The Appellant-Association
filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay
th
challenging the legality of the aforementioned letter dated 11 June,
th
2018 of Respondent No.1 and notice dated 15 June, 2018 of
Respondent No.3 which was dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, these
Appeals have been filed.
2. According to the Central Council of Homoeopathy (Degree
Course) B.H.M.S. Regulations, 1983, a candidate should have passed
the 10+2 or other equivalent examination after a period of 12 years’
study with the last two years of study comprising of Physics, Chemistry
st th
and Biology for admission to 1 year BHMS course. On 5 February,
2018, an information brochure was issued by Respondent No.3 for
NEET UG – 2018 for admission to Health Science courses i.e. MBBS/
2
BDS/ BAMS/ BHMS/ BUMS/ BPTh/ BOTh/ BASLP/ BP&O/ B.Sc. (Nursing)
in all Medical Educational Institutions in a State/ Union territory,
including Medical Educational Institutions established by the Central
Government, State Government, University, Deemed University, Trust,
Society/ Minority Institutions/ Corporations/ Corporations or a company.
The schedule for the entrance examination for admissions for the year
2018-19 was given in the information brochure. The entrance test was
th
scheduled to be conducted on 6 May, 2018 and the results were to be
declared by the first week of June, 2018. After the declaration of
th
results of NEET UG – 2018, a notice was issued on 6 June, 2018 by
Respondent No.3 for online registration. In the meanwhile, the
eligibility criteria for admission to BHMS Degree Course was altered by
th
Respondent No.1 by a letter dated 11 June, 2018 pursuant to which a
notice was issued by Respondent No.3. As per the changed criteria
th
in the letter dated 11 June, 2018, a candidate from the open
category will be eligible for admission only if he/she secured not less
th
than 50 percentile of the marks in NEET-2018. A candidate belonging
th
to the reserved category should secure not less than 40 percentile of
the marks which shall be determined on the basis of highest marks
secured in the all India common merit list in NEET- 2018.
3
3. The Appellant-Association made a representation to the
th
Respondent No.1 on 28 August, 2018 in which they stated that a large
number of seats will remain unfilled if the altered standards are strictly
followed. As there was no response from the Respondent, the
Appellant-Association filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of
th
Judicature at Bombay challenging the letter dated 11 June, 2018 of
Respondent No.1 and the consequential notice of Respondent No.3.
The main contention of the Appellant in the Writ Petition was that the
th
altered standards for admission introduced by letter dated 11 June,
2018 should not be applied to the ongoing admission process and that
the admissions for the year 2018-19 should be conducted in
th
accordance with the information brochure which was issued on 5
February, 2018. The Appellant-Association was not aggrieved by the
introduction of the NEET examination for admission into the BHMS
course. The only submission made on behalf of the Appellant was that
the percentile method should not have been prescribed after the
commencement of the admission process. The High Court rejected the
said submission by holding that the student community was aware
th
about the criterion fixed for the admissions on 11 June, 2018 before
the online process started much before the last date of registration on
th
17 June, 2018. As the selection is on the basis of merit, according to
4
the High Court, introduction of minimum percentile cannot be said to
be unjustified. The point urged on behalf of the Appellant that the
relevant regulations have been altered or modified by an executive fiat
was also rejected by the High Court.
4. Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
Appellant-Management and Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the students submitted that the grievance is
regarding the introduction of the percentile method in June, 2018 in
the midst of the admission process thereby making a large number of
candidates ineligible for admission to the BHMS course. Such
introduction of the percentile method resulted in a number of seats
remaining vacant for the academic session 2018-19. They have
referred to several orders passed by the various High Courts permitting
admission of candidates on the basis of the marks obtained in the
qualifying examinations without taking into account the result of NEET
UG-2018. It was further submitted that it is to nobody’s benefit that a
large number of seats remain unfilled for this academic session. On the
other hand, several aspiring students would be deprived of an
st
opportunity for admission to the 1 year BHMS course. Ms. Pinky
Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the
Respondent No.1, supported the judgment of the High Court stating
5
that the last date for admission to the AYUSH undergraduate courses
th
was 15 November, 2018 and no relief can be granted to the
Appellants. She supported the policy decision of the Respondents on
the basis of which the minimum percentile was stipulated for
st
admission to the 1 year BHMS course. She submitted that the
th th
minimum of 50 percentile in NEET was revised to 35 percentile on
the basis of the representation made on behalf of the Appellants that
several seats would remain unfilled. She further stated that any
further reduction in the minimum percentile would adversely affect the
standards of education. Mr. Katneshwarkar, learned counsel appearing
for Respondent No.2, and Mr. Vinay Navare, learned counsel appearing
for Respondent No.3, supported the learned Additional Solicitor
General. They contended that the colleges should not be permitted to
make admissions as the last date for admissions had expired long back
th
on 15 November, 2018. Mr. Navare submitted that the students will
not be able to complete the minimum number of working days.
5. We have perused the judgments and orders passed by the High
1 2 3 4 5
Courts of Patna , Karnataka , Madras , Rajasthan , Punjab & Haryana ,
1 CWJC No. 2018 dated 10.10.2018
2 WP Nos. 41486-534/2018, WP Nos. 43286-287/2018 & WP Nos. 43304-308/ 2018 dated
11.10.2018
3 WP No.27006/2018, WMP Nos. 31410, 31417 and 31419/ 2018 dated 22.10.2018
4 S.B. Civil Writ No.16430/2018 dated 24.10.2018
5 CWP No.22482/2018, CM-15991-CWP-2018, CM-15992-CWP-2018, CM-16065-CWP-2018 & CM-
16066-CWP-2018 dated 26.10.2018
6
6 7
Allahabad and Kolkata. Directions were issued in favour of the
students permitting admissions on the basis of the marks in the
qualifying examination without reference to the marks secured by
them in the NEET UG-2018 examination. The learned Additional
Solicitor General fairly submitted that none of the judgments or orders
passed by the High Courts have been challenged.
th
6. Though the last date for admission to the BHMS course was 15
November, 2018, we are informed that the last date was extended till
th
20 December, 2018 by the Allahabad High Court. Though there is no
agreement on the exact number of vacant seats, it is common ground
st
that there are vacant seats for admission to the 1 year BHMS course
in the State of Maharashtra. As there is no uniformity in the matter of
st
admission to the 1 year BHMS course for the year 2018-19, as
securing minimum marks in NEET is not required in some States
pursuant to orders of the High Courts, we are of the opinion that the
Appellants are entitled to the relief of admissions being made without
th
reference to the letter dated 11 June, 2018 of Respondent No.1 and
the consequential notice of Respondent No.3. In other words, the
Appellant-Association should be permitted to make admissions to the
6 MISC. Single Nos .18464/2018, 17541/2018, 18747/2018, 31305/2018, 31306/2018, 31308/2018,
31309/2018, 31310/2018, 31311/2018, 31312/2018, 31313/2018, 31314/2018, 31315/2018,
31316/2018, 31317/2018, 31318/2018, 31319/2018, 31320/2018, 31321/2018, 31322/2018,
31323/2018, 31324/2018, 31727/2018, 31733/2018, 31741/2018, 31749/2018, 31753/2018,
31757/2018, 31761/2018, 31901/2018, 31973/2018 & 32653/2018 dated 15.11.2018.
7 WP 22539(W)/ 2018 & WP 22542 (W) 2018 dated 05.12.2018
7
st
1 year BHMS course for the academic session 2018-19 on the basis of
th
the eligibility criteria mentioned in the information brochure dated 5
February, 2018. A candidate who has secured minimum marks in the
st
NEET UG-2018 shall be eligible for admission to the 1 year BHMS
course for the academic year 2018-19.
7. As two months have passed after the last date of admission to the
st th
1 year BHMS course i.e. 15 November, 2018, we direct the
Appellants to complete the process of admissions strictly on the basis
th
of the merit by 15 February, 2019. The Managements of the colleges
are directed to hold extra classes for students who will be admitted
pursuant to this order to comply with the requirements of minimum
working days. This order which is passed in the peculiar facts of the
case shall not be treated as a precedent. No opinion is expressed by
us regarding the introduction of the minimum percentile as an
eligibility criteria in the NEET examination.
8. Appeals are disposed of accordingly.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.______________ of 2019
[ Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 158 of 2019 ]
Leave granted.
8
Ms. Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General for the
Respondent No.1, pointed out that the Ayurvedic medical colleges
stand on a different footing in comparison to the Homoeopathy
medical colleges. We have carefully examined the material on record
and we are convinced that the issue in this Appeal is the same as that
of Homoeopathy colleges, namely, the introduction of minimum
percentile in the NEET for admission to the UG courses for the year
2018-19. Therefore, this Appeal is disposed of in terms of the
judgment in Civil Appeals @ SLP (C) Nos. 766 and 767 of 2019.
..................................J.
[L. NAGESWARA RAO]
..................................J.
[M.R. SHAH]
New Delhi,
February 1, 2019.
9