A candidate cannot be excluded from counselling solely because the caste certificate’s prescribed format awaits verification.

The petitioner claimed membership of the Scheduled Caste (Adi-Dravidar) community, completed her schooling in Government schools in Puducherry, and secured 203 marks in NEET-UG 2026.

She applied to CENTAC on 6 August 2026 for MBBS admission under the Scheduled Caste category and uploaded a community certificate dated 9 June 2025.

CENTAC required a fresh certificate in the prescribed format and altered her category from SC to General with the remark “SC NOT 1964/2002 changed to General,” resulting in her exclusion from the relevant merit and counselling lists.

The petitioner applied to the Tahsildar for a fresh certificate on 18 August 2026 and represented to CENTAC on 16 September 2026, seeking consideration under the SC category subject to production and verification of the fresh certificate.

She thereafter filed the writ petition under Article 226 seeking permission to participate in the ongoing medical counselling under the SC category and the 10% Government School Quota.

Whether the petitioner could be denied an opportunity to participate in the ongoing MBBS counselling solely because she had not yet produced the community certificate in the prescribed format.

Whether the petitioner’s candidature could be considered provisionally under the SC category in the 10% Government School Quota, subject to production and verification of the requisite certificate, applicable eligibility conditions, and seat availability.

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to examine whether the petitioner’s candidature had been prematurely foreclosed during the counselling process.

It applied the principle that a candidate who has claimed a reserved-category status and has taken steps to obtain the prescribed supporting document should not ordinarily be denied an opportunity to participate solely because the certificate is pending in the prescribed format, particularly where verification remains possible.

The Court also recognised that participation in counselling does not create a vested right to admission; candidature remains subject to the applicable admission rules, eligibility requirements, verification of the community certificate, and availability of seats.

The Court found that the petitioner had consistently claimed SC status, had uploaded an existing community certificate, and had acted upon CENTAC’s query by applying to the Tahsildar for a fresh certificate in the prescribed format.

Since the defect concerned the format and pending verification of the certificate, rather than a judicially determined finding that she was ineligible for SC status, the Court held that her candidature ought not to be foreclosed at the counselling stage.

Balancing the petitioner’s opportunity to participate against the respondents’ requirement of documentary verification, the Court permitted provisional participation subject to production of the physical community certificate and compliance with all other eligibility requirements.

It simultaneously directed the Tahsildar to process the petitioner’s application in accordance with law, making clear that the certificate could be issued only if she was legally entitled to it.

The Tahsildar was directed to consider the petitioner’s application and issue a revised community certificate in the prescribed format, strictly in accordance with law, on or before 30 September 2026.

The Court clarified that participation in counselling would not confer any vested right to admission and that final consideration remained subject to the applicable rules, eligibility criteria, verification of the certificate, and availability of seats.

The petition was disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.