Punjab MD/MS admission: Govt’s move to provide 100% institutional preference in state quota seats under HC lens
The Punjab and Haryana high court on Tuesday issued notice to the Punjab government’s move to provide 100% institutional preference in the state quota seats for admission to postgraduate courses in medical institutions of Punjab in the current session.
Image used for representational purpose only CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court on Tuesday issued notice to the Punjab government’s move to provide 100% institutional preference in the state quota seats for admission to postgraduate courses in medical institutions of Punjab in the current session.
“Let the concerned Secretary file his/her affidavit explaining the percentage of reservation provided under the institutional preference as also the exclusion of other candidates in violation of settled principles of law,” ordered the HC.
The registrar of the Baba Farid University of Health Sciences (BFUHS) Faridkot to place on record a list of candidates who have availed the benefit of institutional preference while seeking admission in the first counselling as also the total percentage consumed.
Division bench comprising Justice Jaswant Singh and Justice Sant Prakash has passed the orders while hearing a petition filed by Dr Shubham Mittal alleging that the benefit of institutional preference was granted to the extent of 100% of the total State quota seats in the general and physically disabled category.
According to the petitioner, despite the issuance of directions in 2019, the BFUHS again issued notification for conducting the counselling for admission to MD/MS/PG diploma courses for 2020 session, by providing the benefit of 100% institutional preference, thereby depriving the deserving and meritorious candidates their rightful seat. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the extended institutional preference was against the permissible limit of 50% held by the constitution bench of the Supreme Court (SC) in the case of “Saurabh Chaudhari and others versus the Union of India and others”
It was also argued that institutional preference being horizontal reservation could not have been restricted only to the general and physical handicapped category by excluding the other categories.
The matter has been fixed for June 26 for further hearing.
“Let the concerned Secretary file his/her affidavit explaining the percentage of reservation provided under the institutional preference as also the exclusion of other candidates in violation of settled principles of law,” ordered the HC.
The registrar of the Baba Farid University of Health Sciences (BFUHS) Faridkot to place on record a list of candidates who have availed the benefit of institutional preference while seeking admission in the first counselling as also the total percentage consumed.
Division bench comprising Justice Jaswant Singh and Justice Sant Prakash has passed the orders while hearing a petition filed by Dr Shubham Mittal alleging that the benefit of institutional preference was granted to the extent of 100% of the total State quota seats in the general and physically disabled category.
According to the petitioner, despite the issuance of directions in 2019, the BFUHS again issued notification for conducting the counselling for admission to MD/MS/PG diploma courses for 2020 session, by providing the benefit of 100% institutional preference, thereby depriving the deserving and meritorious candidates their rightful seat. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the extended institutional preference was against the permissible limit of 50% held by the constitution bench of the Supreme Court (SC) in the case of “Saurabh Chaudhari and others versus the Union of India and others”
It was also argued that institutional preference being horizontal reservation could not have been restricted only to the general and physical handicapped category by excluding the other categories.
The matter has been fixed for June 26 for further hearing.
All Comments ()+^ Back to Top
Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.
HIDE