Improvement of marks via NIOS disqualifies candidate from State Government School (SGS) quota reservation.

In brief

The question

1. Whether a candidate who improves their qualifying marks through a national open schooling board (NIOS) rather than the state board (CHSE) remains eligible for reservation under the State Government Schools (SGS) quota.

The court held

The Court answered the issues in the negative, holding that the petitioner was ineligible for the SGS quota because his qualifying 12th-grade marks were fulfilled through NIOS, which is outside the scope of the state’s reservation policy

It also directed

The Court ruled that SGS reservation requires a single certificate of qualification from the State Board (CHSE) with the requisite minimum marks.

Accordingly, the High Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed the writ

01Facts

The petitioner passed his 10th Board (2012) under the Board of Secondary Education, Odisha, and his 12th Board (2014) through the Council of Higher Secondary Education (CHSE), Odisha, from Christ College, Cuttack

¶ 2(i)

In the 2014 CHSE exams, he secured only 49.66% in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology (PCB), falling short of the 50% eligibility criteria for medical admissions

¶ 11

To improve his marks, the petitioner appeared for the Chemistry paper through the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) in 2022, securing 64 marks

¶ 2(ii)

Based on this combined score, he qualified for NEET-UG 2025 and participated in OJEE counseling

¶ 2(iii-iv)

However, during the Spot/Stray Round on 13.11.2025, the petitioner was denied a seat under the State Government Schools (SGS) quota—which reserves 15% of seats for students from state government schools—on the grounds that his improvement marks were from NIOS, not the state board

¶ 2(vii)

02Issues

i.1. Whether a candidate who improves their qualifying marks through a national open schooling board (NIOS) rather than the state board (CHSE) remains eligible for reservation under the State Government Schools (SGS) quota.

¶ 14 / 15

ii.2. Whether the OJEE authorities were estopped from denying the petitioner's eligibility under the SGS quota after having initially issued a Document Verification Certificate and assigned him an SGS rank.

¶ 8 / 15

03Law Applied

Section 9(1) of the Odisha Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2007, and the State Government Notification dated 26.03.2021

¶ 11 & 14

These provisions mandate that 15% horizontal reservation (SGS quota) is restricted to students who have passed the 10th Board under the Board of Secondary Education (BSE), Odisha, and the 12th Board under the Council of Higher Secondary Education (CHSE), Odisha, specifically from Government High Schools/Junior Colleges

¶ 12 & 14

Definitions of "High School" and "Junior College" under Section 3(i), (j), and (j-1) of the Odisha Education Act, 1969, to determine the status of educational institutions

¶ 12

Provisions in the judgment · 2

Orissa Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2007 Section 9

Orissa Education Act, 1969 Section 3

04Reasoning

The Court reasoned that the SGS quota is a specific privilege designed for students who complete their entire secondary and higher secondary education within the Odisha state government school system

¶ 14

While the National Medical Commission (NMC) allows NIOS marks for general NEET eligibility, the state's SGS reservation policy is more restrictive.

¶ 5

The Court observed that NIOS is an autonomous central institution and does not qualify as a "Government Higher Secondary School" or "Junior College" as defined by the Odisha Education Act, 1969

¶ 12

Consequently, the petitioner failed to meet the dual requirement of passing both the 10th and 12th levels exclusively under the specified Odisha State Boards and institutions

¶ 15

The court rejected the plea of estoppel, implying that statutory reservation criteria cannot be waived by the erroneous issuance of a verification certificate, and held that a candidate cannot claim the specific "privilege" of SGS reservation while relying on a non-state board (NIOS) to meet the basic eligibility marks

¶ 15