Constitution Bench of SC to decide on Reservation for in-service candidates in PG Medical Courses

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court will examine the scope of power of State governments to legislate on the procedure of admission of candidates to Post Graduate Medical Courses and for provision of reservation for in-service candidates..A petition filed in this regard by the Tamil Nadu Medical Officers’ Association was heard by a three-judge Bench comprising Justices Kurian Joseph, Mohan M Shantanagoudar and Navin Sinha which held that the matter needs to be considered by a larger Bench..The petition challenges the regulations formulated by the Medical Council of India under Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 relating to reservation in favour of the in-service candidates for admission to Post graduate medical courses..The regulations in question in this matter are Regulation 9(4) and 9(8). Regulation 9(4) allows a marks weightage to be given in National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) to candidates who have been in service for government or public authority at notified remote, rural or difficult areas and allows for a 10% incentive for each year of service with a ceiling of 30%..The other regulation which is a bone of contention here is 9(8) which culls out a 50% reservation in Post Graduate Diploma Courses for such in-service candidates..“50% of the seats in Postgraduate Diploma Courses shall be reserved for Medical Officers in the Government service, who have served for at least three years in remote and /or difficult areas and / or Rural areas. After acquiring the Postgraduate Diploma, the Medical Officers shall serve for two more years in remote and /or difficult areas and / or Rural areas as defined by State Government/Competent authority from time to time. …” .When a similar matter was adjudged upon by a three-judge bench of the SC in State of Uttar Pradesh and Others v. Dinesh Singh Chauhan, in 2016, the Court had laid down that Regulation 9 of the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 was an all-encompassing code regarding the admission procedure for medical institutes..The Court in that judgment had ruled that the proviso in Regulation 9(4) merely provides for a marks incentive for in-service candidates not for a reservation; and as regards the 50% reservation carved out for such candidates under Regulation 9(8), the Court drew a distinction between “degree” and “diploma” courses and laid down that such a reservation was not available for “degree” courses..Consequently, the Court had also said that State governments do not have the authority to enact any law which goes against these procedures put in place by Central legislation stating that “co-ordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions” is a subject matter in the Union List under Entry 66..The petitioner in the present case submitted that a mere incentive of marks will not ensure benefit to the in-service candidates and while a 50% reservation for such candidates is allowed for Diploma courses, the same should not be withheld when it comes to Degree courses. The petitioner also contended that the subject matter of Education, which includes medical education specifically, falls in the Concurrent List under Entry 25 and as such, State authorities should have the right to legislate and provide for a 50% reservation for in-service candidates even in Degree courses..The respondent in this case argued that all the contentions raised by the petitioner have been dealt with in the Dinesh Singh Chauhan case but the Court concluded otherwise stating,.“we are of the view that Dinesh Singh Chauhan, has not considered the legislative entries in respect of the contentions we have noted above. Apparently, it appears no such contentions were raised before the Court.”.The Court, therefore, held that the petition needs to be considered by a larger Bench and has placed this matter before the Chief Justice of India to be heard by a larger Bench..Liberty was also granted to the petitioners to mention the matter before the Chief Justice of India on April 16, 2018 for constituting appropriate Bench..Read the judgment below.