SC reserves verdict on Telangana's domicile rule for medical admissions
The state government through the Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, amended in 2024, entitled only those students, who have studied for last four years up to Class 12 in the state, to admissions in the medical and dental colleges under the state quota.
The Telangana High Court held that the state's permanent residents cannot be denied benefits of admissions in the medical colleges only because they lived outside the state for sometime.
On Tuesday, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran heard detailed arguments from both sides, including the Telangana government's counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi.
Defending the state's four-year domicile criterion, Singhvi said once a domicile rule is established, "a threshold becomes inevitable".
He said Telangana relied on a government order backed by a presidential order and, moreover, only the state government, not courts, could define "permanent residence".
The CJI referred to the practical consequences of the rule, illustrating if "a Telangana judge is transferred to Bihar and his son studies in classes 9, 10, 11 and 12 in Bihar then the boy is disentitled from getting admissions in his home state".
"Take a student born and raised in Telangana but moves away for just classes 10 and 11 and say, to Kota for coaching. Or an IAS officer from Telangana posted in Delhi, whose child studies outside the state for two years. Should such children be disqualified?" the CJI asked.
Justice Chandran weighed in, "If a person remains idle in Telangana for four years, they qualify. But someone who leaves to study doesn't. Isn't that an anomaly?"
Singhvi said the high court created the term "permanent resident," which only the state has the authority to define.
The top court on September 20 last year stayed the high court order directing permanent residents or those domiciled in the state couldn't be denied the benefit of admission in the medical colleges only because they remained outside Telangana for sometime for their studies or residence.
The state government, however, agreed to grant a one-time exception to 135 students, who had moved the high court, in admissions in the medical and dental colleges in 2024.
The state's appeal argued that the high court erroneously held Rule 3(a) of the amended Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, to be interpreted to mean the respondents (candidates) were eligible to admission in the medical colleges in Telangana.
The rule mandated four consecutive years of study in the state for students seeking admission in Telangana medical colleges before qualifying the exam.
The state's plea argued such an order by the high court overlooked the fact that Telangana possesses the legislative competence to determine various requirements, including domicile, permanent resident status, etc.
The high court's judgement, it said, mandates the state to prepare new rules for admission, which was a time-intensive process.
"After framing the rules students have to apply and collect the requisite certificates from authorities concerned. Each certificate submitted by the student needs to be verified by the Health University. Whereas the present rule prescribes that the students can produce their educational certificate without approaching any office or authority. If the judgement of the high court is implemented, it will result in a huge delay in the allotment of seats to MBBS and BDS students," the plea added. PTI>
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Supreme Court brings orphans under RTE quota, asks government to count them in next census
The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that orphaned children must be considered part of 'disadvantaged groups' under the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, making them eligible for admission under the 25% quota in all aided, unaided and special category schools. The top court also urged the Union government to count orphaned children in the upcoming 2027 census by including a separate category for them. The Supreme Court observed that for orphaned children, the State must act in parens patriae -- as the legal guardian -- and that their foremost right is access to education.(File/HT PHOTO) A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan directed all states and Union territories to issue notifications within four weeks clarifying that the term 'child belonging to disadvantaged groups', as defined in Section 2(d) of the Act, also includes orphaned children. 'The term 'such other group having disadvantage owing to social, cultural, economical, geographical, linguistic, gender or such other factor,' in Section 2(1)(d) must include orphan children, as they are socially and economically disadvantaged,' held the court, noting that orphans, whether in orphanages or protected institutions, deserve to be covered under this constitutional mandate. The court observed that for orphaned children, the State must act in parens patriae -- as the legal guardian -- and that their foremost right is access to education. 'Sections 3 and 12 of the RTE Act mandate free and compulsory education. The right of orphans to be admitted to schools under the 25 per cent quota must be enforced,' the bench said. The court directed all states and UTs to conduct surveys of orphan children admitted under the RTE Act and explain reasons where such admissions have not taken place. Pending such an exercise, the bench said orphans should be admitted in neighbourhood schools without delay. States were warned that if notifications are not issued within four weeks, education secretaries concerned will have to submit personal affidavits explaining the delay. The bench took note that Delhi, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Sikkim, Manipur and Gujarat have already issued such notifications in the past. It urged other states to follow suit through simple administrative orders. The court also urged the government to include a separate column for orphaned children in the upcoming national census scheduled for 2027.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Election Commission issues notification for vice presidential polls, nomination process kicks off from today
The Election Commission of India issued a notification on Thursday for the 9 September election to the vice president's post, kickstarting the nomination process. With the Election Commission notification, nominations for vice presidential elections begin. The date for filing nominations is 21 August. The nominations will be scrutinised on 22 August, and the last date for withdrawing nominations will be 25 August, as per the schedule issued by the Election Commission. The notification by Election Commission comes after Jagdeep Dhankhar resigned as Vice President on 21 July, opening the contest for his successor. Dhankhar, 74, assumed office in August 2022, and his tenure was till 2027. As per Article 66(1) of the Constitution, the Vice President of India is elected by an Electoral College comprising the elected members of the Rajya Sabha, the nominated members of the Rajya Sabha, and the elected members of the Lok Sabha. According to Articles 63 to 71 of the Constitution and the Vice President (Election) Rules, 1974, a formal election had to be held by Election Commission within 60 days of Dhankhar's resignation and before 19 September 2025. The electorate or the electoral college comprises all members of both Houses of Parliament—elected and nominated—using a proportional representation system via a single transferable vote. The MPs will cast a single transferable vote with a secret ballot. The electoral college currently has 788 MPs, 588 in Lok Sabha and 245 in Rajya Sabha. The ruling BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) has a majority in the electorate, which includes the members of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Both the NDA and the opposition INDIA bloc are expected to nominate candidates.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Land-pooling policy: Does policy have provision for rehab of landless labourers, HC asks Punjab
The high court on Wednesday asked the Punjab government whether it had carried out the social and environmental impact assessment before notifying the land-pooling policy or not. The petition was filed by Ludhiana resident Gurdeep Singh Gill who had challenged the policy, notified on June 4, stating that around 26,000 acres of land in the district had been notified for setting up of residential and commercial projects without carrying out the necessary environment and social impact assessment The court also asked the state government to spell out whether the policy --- that has raised the hackles of Opposition leaders and farmers --- had provisions for rehabilitation of landless labourers and others. These questions were raised by the bench of justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and justice Deepak Manchanda, while the state's advocate general Maninderjit Singh gave an undertaking that the policy would be kept on hold and no further steps would be taken till the next date of hearing. The matter will be taken up again on Thursday. The petition was filed by Ludhiana resident Gurdeep Singh Gill who had challenged the policy, notified on June 4, stating that around 26,000 acres of land in the district had been notified for setting up of residential and commercial projects without carrying out the necessary environment and social impact assessment which is an essential prerequisite for acquisition of land under Sections 4 to 8 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Even the assessment as to whether it will serve the 'public purpose' for setting up residential and commercial complexes as set out in the Act of 2013 was not undertaken, he had alleged further underlining that a large number of public/private housing/commercial projects are already underway and are more than adequate to meet the existing and future needs of the public. Hence, the Act of 2013 is being circumvented and the policy is wholly arbitrary and irrational, the plea alleged. It was also argued that there is no provision for providing compensation at the time of acquisition and only an annual livelihood allowance of ₹50,000/- per acre would be paid but it would be too meagre for the sustenance of families of small and marginal farmers, who would be affected adversely. The policy is discriminatory against small landowners, he further claimed. The court while deferring hearing asked the AG to inform the court if the environmental impact assessment had been carried for which directions were issued by the Supreme Court in 2023 while observing that before permitting urban development, the environmental impact assessment study should be conducted.
