Holding

The admission schedule for postgraduate medical courses must be strictly followed, with no extension beyond 31 May, rendering the High Court’s orders granting provisional admissions illegal.

Summary

The respondents, a group of MBBS graduates who appeared in the NEET‑PG 2019 examination, failed to secure postgraduate medical seats due to their lower merit rank, even though about 153 seats remained vacant after the final counselling on 31 May 2019. They filed writ petitions seeking admission beyond the statutory cut‑off date of 31 May, and the Calcutta High Court, by interim orders and later an absolute order, directed the university to grant them provisional admissions despite the schedule. The Board of Governors of the Medical Council of India (now the National Medical Commission) appealed, contending that the admission schedule prescribed in the MCI Post‑Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 must be strictly adhered to and that the High Court’s orders violated the principle of merit and the statutory deadline. The Supreme Court held that the time‑schedule for postgraduate admissions is mandatory, no authority may extend the cut‑off date, and the High Court’s orders are legally unsustainable. Consequently, the appeals were allowed and the High Court orders were quashed.

Issues considered

The admission schedule for postgraduate medical courses can be extended beyond the statutory cut‑off date of 31 May 2019.
Whether provisional admissions granted after the cut‑off date violate the MCI Post‑Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 and the principle of merit.
Whether the High Court’s interim and absolute orders are legally sustainable in view of the statutory schedule and Supreme Court precedents.

Legislation cited

Medical Council of India Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000

Subjects

medical admissionNEET‑PGadmission schedulemerit principlecut‑off dateprovisional admissionhigh court ordersSupreme Courtpostgraduate medical seatsvacant seatsregulatory compliance

Judgment

[2022] 14 S.C.R. 997 997

BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL A
COUNCIL OF INDIA
v.
DR. PRIYAMBADA SHARMA & OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No (s). 7534 of 2022) B
OCTOBER 17, 2022
[AJAY RASTOGI AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Education/Educational institutions: Medical admission –
NEET-PG course – Time schedule fixed for admission to the medical
C
colleges, last date not to be extended after 31st May – After the
admission/counselling process was over on 31st May, 2019,
approximately 153 seats remained vacant in State Quota of the
postgraduate medical seats for the academic year 2019-20 –
Respondent-students failed to secure admission to postgraduate
medical seat because of their much lower rank in the order of merit D
– Writ petition by the respondents that although the final round of
counselling on 31st May, 2019 is over, the postgraduate seats for
academic session 2019-20 are still available/lying vacant and they
may be considered for admission in the postgraduate medical course
against the said vacant seats – Single Judge of the High Court by
E
interim orders directed the appellant to grant provisional admissions
to the students in postgraduate medical courses by ignoring the
cutoff date-31st May and also ignoring the principle of merit, and
these interim orders were later made absolute – In appeal before
this Court, the interim orders as also the final order passed by the
High Court, stayed – Held: Time schedule for admission to the F
postgraduate medical courses must be followed strictly leaving no
discretion to any authority to permit admissions over the cutoff date
under schedule for admission to postgraduate medical courses-31st
May – Interim orders passed by the High Court which were later
made absolute are not legally sustainable – Respondents participated
G
in the second round of counselling but failed to get any seat in the
postgraduate medical course because of lower rank in order of
merit and by interim orders, the provisional admissions were granted
to them ignoring the principle of merit which cannot be accepted –
Furthermore, no sympathy can be shown to such students, and
despite the stay order passed by this Court, if they are allowed to H
997
998 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 14 S.C.R.

A continue in postgraduate medical courses, the same would be illegal
and such contemptuous action on the part of the authorities, cannot
be approved – Thus, the orders passed by the High Court are
quashed and set aside – Medical Council of India Postgraduate
Medical Education Regulations, 2000.
B Mridul Dhar (Minor) and Another v. Union of India
and Others (2005) 2 SCC 65 : [2005] 1 SCR 380; Priya
Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others (2012) 7 SCC
433 : [2012] 5 SCR 768; Ashish Ranjan and Others v.
Union of India and Others (2016) 11 SCC 225 : 2016
(4 ) JT 127; Education Promotion Society for India
C and Another v. Union of India and Others (2019) 7
SCC 38 : [2019] 8 SCR 794; Dr. Astha Goel and Others
v. Medical Counselling Committee and Others 2022
SCC OnLine SC 734; Medical Council of India v. Ritwik
& Others 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3280 – referred to.
D Case Law Reference
[2005] 1 SCR 380 referred to Para 7
[2012] 5 SCR 768 referred to Para 7
[2019] 8 SCR 794 referred to Para 22
E
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 7533-
7534 of 2022.
From the Judgment and Orders dated 16.07.2019 and 04.11.2019
of the High Court of Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri in W.P.A. No.
239 of 2019.
F
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 7535, 7536, 7537, 7538, 7539, 7540, 7541, 7542
of 2022.
Gaurav Sharma, Dhawal Mohan, Prateek Bhatia, Ms. Mitushi
G Goyal, Advs. for the Appellant.
Abhratosh Majumdar, Sr. Adv., Rohit Dutta, Prabhat Kumar
Srivastava, Ms. Priyata Chakraborty, Ms. Shalini Kaul, Satish Kumar,
Puneet Jain, Ms. Rashmi Singhania, Sarad Kumar Singhania, Yogit Kamat,
Sudhansu Palo, Subhasish Bhowmick, Ms. Manisha Pandey, Advs. for
H the Respondents.
BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF 999
INDIA v. DR. PRIYAMBADA SHARMA

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by A
RASTOGI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The Board of Governors of Medical Council of India (now,
“The National Medical Commission”) has filed these appeals assailing B
the judgment of the High Court of Calcutta directing respondent no.2-
West Bengal University of Health Sciences to admit the respondent-
candidates initially by interim orders dated 04th June 2019, 16th July, 2019
and 30th July, 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court
of Calcutta granting provisional admission pursuant to interim orders to
the student-applicants in post-graduate medical courses beyond the cut- C
off date in complete ignorance of their placement in the order of merit in
post-graduate medical courses, which were later disposed of by an Order
dated 4th November, 2019 on the premise that since the respondent-
students have undergone six months of post-graduate medical course,
their provisional admission stand regularized and later directed to be D
treated as a regular post-graduate student.
3. Facts have been noticed from Civil Appeal @ SLP(C) Nos.3507-
3508 of 2020 and Civil Appeal @ SLP(C) No.27463 of 2019.
4. It is not disputed that the respondent-students are MBBS
Doctors and appeared in NEET (PG)-2019 entrance examination seeking E
admission in State quota seats in post-graduate medical courses in medical
colleges of the State of West Bengal for the academic year 2019-2020.
5. The result of NEET-PG was declared by the National Board
of Education (NBE) on 31st January, 2019. The minimum cut-off
qualifying marks for NEET examination are as follows:- F
1) Unreserved category - 50th percentile – 340/1200 marks
2) Reserved category(SC/ST/OBC)-40th percentile – 292/1200
marks
3) PwD – 45th percentile – 317/1200 marks G
The NEET marks and the rank of the respondent-students are as
under:-
1) Priyambada Sharma-NEET Score:386/1200; NEET
Rank:57960
H
1000 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 14 S.C.R.

A 2) Priti Dhara - NEET Score:386/1200; NEET Rank:57948
3) Alankret Dhillon - NEET Score:387/1200; NEET Rank:57581
4) Anirban Bose - NEET Score:318/1200; NEET Rank:78437
5) Mohd. Asif Kabir - NEET Score:341/1200; NEET Rank:71142
B 6) Kaustav De - NEET Score:626/1200; NEET Rank:24442
7) Sujan Kr. Ghosh - NEET Score:403/1200; NEET Rank:53324
8) Pushpak Ghose - NEET Score:626/1200; NEET Rank:12177
9) Sanjib Kr. Choudhary - NEET Score:319/1200; NEET
C Rank:78012
6. The admission schedule for the academic year 2018-19 onwards
for post-graduate courses as provided in the Medical Council of India
Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000(hereinafter being
referred to as the “Regulations 2000”) amended upto May, 2018 is as
D follows:-
In the above Appendix the time schedule with regard to
Broad Speciality has been substituted with the following in
terms of Notification published in the Gazette of India on
20.02.2018 and 05.04.2018.
E Admission schedule from the academic year 2018-19 onwards
for Postgraduate courses (broad speciality):-

th

F st th th th th
th th
rd rd th
nd th th th th
th th
nd nd rd
th th th
nd

G th th

th th

st th

H
BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF 1001
INDIA v. DR. PRIYAMBADA SHARMA [AJAY RASTOGI, J.]

Note: A
1. All India Quota Seats remaining vacant after last date for joining
i.e. 10th May will be deemed to be converted into State Quota.
2. Institute/College/Courses permitted after 28th February will not
be considered for admission/allotment of seats for current
academic year. B

3. In any circumstances, last date for admission/joining will
not be extended after 31st May.
4. For the purpose of ensuring faithful obedience to the above
time-schedule, Saturday, Sunday or Holidays (except National C
Holiday) shall be treated as working day.
5. The following Matrix shall be applicable with regard to
permissibility to students to exercise fresh choice during
counselling:-
Round Free Exit with Ineligible for Amount of D
forfeiture of further registration fee
Exit fees counselling
AIQ I/ Deemed
AIQ II/ If not If joined Government -
Deemed joined Rs.25,000 (half
for SC/ST/OBC)
Deemed – E
Rs.2,00,000
State Quota I
State Quota II If not If joined Government -
joined Rs.25,000 (half
for SC/ST/OBC)
Private –
Rs.2,00,000 F
State Quota
Mop-Up
Deemed Mop-
Up

7. The admission schedule has to be rigidly followed in admission G
to the post-graduate courses and Note 3 appended thereto clearly
stipulates that, in any circumstances, last date for admission/joining will
not be extended beyond 31st May and no deviation from the admission
schedule is permissible and this schedule has been fixed by this Court
pursuant to the judgment in Mridul Dhar (Minor) and Another vs.
H
1002 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 14 S.C.R.

A Union of India and Others1 followed in Priya Gupta vs. State of
Chhattisgarh and Others2 and Ashish Ranjan and Others vs. Union
of India and Others3.
8. It will be relevant to note that this Court in Mridul Dhar (Minor)
and Another (supra) noted that there was no consistency in fixing the
B time schedule for admissions to medical courses and there were much
irregularities in maintaining a prescribed schedule which has been
exploited by medical colleges by admitting undeserved students and that
was affecting the academic session. This Court intervened in the matter
and fixed the time schedule for admission to the medical colleges including
post-graduate admissions and accordingly, the schedule was notified by
C the Medical Council of India and direction was given for strict adherence
of rules which was later reiterated in Priya Gupta (supra) followed by
Ashish Ranjan and Others (supra).
9. This Court specifically gave its approval to the admission
schedule which has been prescribed under the broucher of Medical
D Council of India (now, The National Medical Commission) for the
academic year 2018-19 onwards for the post-graduate medical courses
which the Commission has to strictly follow and no deviation is permissible
in any circumstances and accordingly last date for admission/joining will
not be extended after 31st May.
E 10. It reveals from the record that after the admission/counselling
process was over on 31st May, 2019, approximately 153 seats remained
vacant in State Quota of the post-graduate medical seats for the academic
year 2019-20 and the respondent-students have failed in their attempt
after participating in the last counselling in securing admission to post-
F graduate medical seat in any of the specialty because of their much
lower rank in the order of merit.
11. At this stage, the respondent Dr. Priyambada Sharma and
others filed their writ petitions before the High Court under Article 226
of the Constitution with the grievance that although the final round of
G counselling on 31st May, 2019 is over, the post-graduate seats for academic
session 2019-20 are still available/lying vacant and at least against the
vacant seats, they may be considered for admission in the post-graduate
medical course.
1
(2005) 2 SCC 65
2
(2012) 7 SCC 433
H 3
(2016) 11 SCC 225
BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF 1003
INDIA v. DR. PRIYAMBADA SHARMA [AJAY RASTOGI, J.]

12. The learned Single Judge by interim orders dated 04th June, A
2019, 16th July, 2019 and 30th July, 2019 in a batch of writ petitions directed
the appellant to grant provisional admissions to the students in post-
graduate medical courses by ignoring the cut-off date i.e. 31st May and
also ignoring the principle of merit and these interim orders were later
made absolute by order dated 04th November, 2019 on the premise that
B
the students have joined post-graduate medical courses and have
undergone training/education for six months or more and accordingly,
such admissions are regularized and each of them who have joined post-
graduate medical course shall be treated as normal post-graduate student.
13. These orders became a subject matter of challenge in special
leave petitions before this Court and the interim orders and also the final C
order dated 04th November, 2019 passed by the High Court were stayed
by this Court in the respective special leave petitions. It is informed that
so far as respondent Dr. Priyambada Sharma is concerned, she has not
continued her studies since September, 2019. At the same time, in Civil
Appeal @ SLP(C) No.27463 of 2019, respondent-students were allowed D
to pursue the course by the University despite the stay order granted by
this Court.
14. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the High Court
has committed manifest error in directing the provisional admissions in
this batch of appeals in post-graduate medical courses in the academic E
year 2019-20 beyond 31st May and that apart, the admission could not
have been made on the principle of first-cum-first-serve regardless of
their placement in the order of merit which is the touchstone for admissions
to the post-graduate medical courses. Such orders passed by the High
Court are not legally sustainable and deserve to be set aside.
F
15. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that merely
because some of the students have been allowed to be continued on
provisional basis in post-graduate medical courses despite the stay order
passed by this Court, no sympathy can be claimed by them and such
misplaced sympathy indeed will lay down a bad precedent and submits
that all such interim orders and the provisional admissions made of the G
respective respondents students in post-graduate medical courses for
the academic year 2019-20 deserve to be quashed and set aside.
16. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that in
numerous cases, petitions have been filed in this Court seeking extension
H
1004 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 14 S.C.R.

A of time either on account of some particular exigency faced by any
individual college or university but generally on the ground that large
number of seats for post-graduate courses either remained unfilled or
are lying vacant and this Court has declined such request with the direction
that time schedule must be strictly adhered to.
B 17. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits
that either of the respondent-student was not at fault and only because
of the interim orders passed by the High Court in the first instance, the
University could not conduct the second round of counselling within the
time schedule and pursuant to the order of the Division Bench dated 30 th
May 2019, the second round of counselling was held on 31st May, 2019
C
and on the same day, admissions to post-graduate medical courses were
closed. Only to meet out the aforesaid difficulty, interim orders were
passed by the High Court in the interest of justice. In the first instance,
the respondent-students are deprived from participating in a fair manner
in the second round of counselling which was held on 31st May, 2019
D and that was the reason for which the respondents approached the High
Court by filing the writ petitions and taking the legitimate grievance of
the students, interim orders were passed granting provisional admissions
to post-graduate medical courses without disturbing the admissions
already made and the students have become the victims of delay in
holding the second round of counselling for the academic year 2019-20.
E
18. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the
students were not at fault and any intervention made by the High Court
while passing the interim orders in the first instance interfering the
admission process duly notified, in no manner, could be attributed to the
students but ultimately down the line, it is the students who suffer and at
F
least such of the students who have completed their course or are at the
verge of completing the course, be permitted to complete the course and
to appear in the examination and if that is not being permitted in the
given facts and circumstances, they will only lose three precious years
of their life and neither the appellant nor anyone else is going to be
G benefitted.
19. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their
assistance perused the material available on record.
20. That so far as the time schedule prescribed by the Medical
H Council of India in its Regulations, 2000 of which reference has been
BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF 1005
INDIA v. DR. PRIYAMBADA SHARMA [AJAY RASTOGI, J.]

made for the academic year 2019-20 for admission to the post-graduate A
medical courses is concerned, it has to be strictly followed and that, in
any circumstance, is not to be deviated. Last date for admissions to the
post-graduate medical course will not be extended after 31st May and
the schedule has been prescribed in compliance of the judgments of this
Court of which reference has been made in Mridul Dhar (Minor) and
B
Another (supra) followed by this Court in Priya Gupta (supra) and
Ashish Ranjan and Others (supra) and this Court has consistently
held that the schedule for admission to the post-graduate medical courses
must be followed strictly leaving no discretion to any authority to permit
admissions over the cut-off date under schedule for admission to post-
graduate medical courses i.e. 31st May. C
21. That even when the complaints are made to this Court that
large number of seats are lying vacant seeking extension of time to fill
those unfilled undergraduate/post-graduate seats of medical courses, this
Court always declined such requests and directed that schedule must be
strictly adhered to. D
22. This Court in Education Promotion Society for India and
Another vs. Union of India and Others4 held as under:-
“6. In this case the petitioners want a general extension of time
not on account of any particular difficulty faced by any individual E
college or university but generally on the ground that a large
number of seats for the PG courses are lying vacant. It is stated
that more than 1000 seats are lying vacant. In the affidavit filed
by the UoI it is mentioned that as far as deemed universities are
concerned there are 603 seats lying vacant. However, it is important
to note that out of 603 seats lying vacant only 31 are in clinical F
subjects and the vast majority (572) that is almost 95% of the
seats are lying vacant in non-clinical subjects. There is no material
on record to show as to what is the situation with regard to the
remaining 400-500 seats. This Court however can take judicial
notice of the fact that every year large number of non-clinical G
seats remain vacant because many graduate doctors do not want
to do postgraduation in non-clinical subjects. Merely because the
seats are lying vacant, in our view, is not a ground to grant extension
of time and grant further opportunity to fill up vacant seats. The
4
(2019) 7 SCC 38 H
1006 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 14 S.C.R.

A schedule must be followed. If we permit violation of schedule and
grant extension, we shall be opening a pandora’s box and the
whole purpose of fixing a time schedule and laying down a regime
which strictly adheres to time schedule will be defeated.”
23. Further, this Court in Dr. Astha Goel and Others vs. Medical
B Counselling Committee and Others5 held as under:-
“23. Applying the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid
two decisions to the facts of the case on hand and when the
Medical Counselling Committee and the Union of India have to
adhere to the time schedule for completing the admission process
C and when the current admission of NEET-PG-2021 is already
behind time schedule and ever after conducting eight to nine rounds
of counselling, still some seats, which are mainly non-clinical
courses seats have remained vacant and thereafter when a
conscious decision is taken by the Union Government/the Medical
Counselling Committee, not to conduct a further Special Stray
D
Round of counselling, it cannot be said that the same is arbitrary.
The decision of the Union Government and the Medical
Counselling Committee not to have Special Stray Round of
counselling is in the interest of Medical Education and Public
Health. There cannot be any compromise with the merits and/or
E quality of Medical Education, which may ultimately affect the
Public Health.
26. At the cost of repetition, it is observed and held that even
after eight to nine rounds of counselling, out of 40,000 seats, 1456
seats have remained vacant, out of which approximately, more
F than 1100 seats are non-clinical seats, which every year remain
vacant, of which the judicial notice has been taken by this Court
in the case of Education Promotion Society for India (supra).”
24. In the given facts and circumstances, in our considered view,
the interim orders passed by the High Court granting provisional
G admissions in the post-graduate medical courses in the months of June
and July, 2019 by orders dated 04th June, 2019, 16th July, 2019 and
30 th July, 2019 which were later made absolute by an order dated
04th November, 2019 are not legally sustainable.

5
H 2022 SCC OnLine SC 734
BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF 1007
INDIA v. DR. PRIYAMBADA SHARMA [AJAY RASTOGI, J.]

25. The feeble submission made by the respondents’ counsel that A
a sympathetic view may be taken on the premise that they have been
allowed to continue in their respective post-graduate medical courses
for quite some time or few of them have completed the course in the
interregnum despite the order of stay granted by this Court and the reliance
placed on the judgment of this Court in Medical Council of India vs.
B
Ritwik & Others6, in our view, may not be of any assistance for the
reason that it was a case where the student was selected in the counselling
in the first year MBBS course but was not granted admission due to his
inability to pay the fee before the last date i.e. 31st August, 2018 and he
was allowed to continue and pursue the course by interim order passed
by this Court. In the given peculiar facts and circumstances, his admission C
was approved under the order of this Court. As far as the cases of
present respondents are concerned, they have participated in the second
round of counselling but failed to get any seat in the post-graduate medical
course because of lower rank in order of merit and by interim orders
passed by the High Court, provisional admissions were granted to them
D
ignoring the principle of merit which cannot be countenanced by this
Court.
26. In our considered view, no sympathy can be shown to such
students who have not only entered/admitted after 31st May of the year
but their admissions were completely in contravention to the Regulations,
E
2000 and provisional admissions were granted by the High Court ignoring
the principle of merit which is the sole touchstone for admission to the
post-graduate courses based on the NEET examination, 2019 where
admissions are made strictly in the order of merit-cum-preference and
despite the stay order passed by this Court, if they are allowed to continue
in post-graduate medical courses, the same would be completely illegal F
and such contemptuous action on the part of the authorities, cannot be
approved by this Court.
27. Consequently, the appeals succeed and are accordingly
allowed. The impugned orders passed by the High Court in the respective
appeals are hereby quashed and set aside. No costs. G
28. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

Nidhi Jain Appeals allowed.

6
2021 SCC OnLine SC 3280 H