Holding

The scheme for 15% reservation and the All‑India Entrance Examination must be implemented from the 1988‑89 academic session, and the injunction restraining the filling of those seats is recalled.

Summary

The Supreme Court was asked to consider objections raised by several states to the implementation of a Court‑approved scheme that reserved 15% of MBBS/BDS seats for an All‑India Entrance Examination. The states sought a further deferment of the scheme, arguing lack of uniform syllabus, language barriers, and law‑and‑order problems. The Court held that the scheme, having been prepared and approved, must be implemented without further delay and that the objections did not justify postponement. It directed that the examination be held in June 1988 and that the scheme become operative for the 1988‑89 academic session. Consequently, the earlier injunction restraining states from filling the 15% reserved seats was recalled, allowing institutions to admit students under their own procedures. The Court emphasized the need for national cohesion in medical education and rejected the states' pleas for additional time.

Issues considered

The validity of the states' objections to the implementation of the 15% reservation scheme and All‑India Entrance Examination.
Whether the scheme could be further deferred beyond the 1988‑89 academic session.
Whether the injunction restraining the filling of the 15% reserved seats should remain in force.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 32

Subjects

reservationmedical educationMBBS admissionAll India Entrance Examinationstate objectionssyllabus uniformitylanguage requirementinjunction

Judgment

A DR. DINESH KUMAR & ORS. >..
v.
MOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE,
ALLAHABAD & ORS.

AUGUST 3, 1987
B (
[RANGANATH MISRA AND M.M. DUTT, JJ.]

Professional Colleges-Medical Colleges-Admission to MBBS!
BDS Course-Implementation of Scheme and holding of All India
""' -
c
Entrance Examination for filling up of 15% reserved seats-Directions
of Court. -
Pursuant to this Court's directions regarding the reservation of
seats for admission to different courses of study such as MBBS/BDS and
Post Graduate Specialities and holding of an All India Entrance Exami·
nation therefor, contained in its judgment delivered in a group of writ
D petitions on June 22, 1984, a Scheme was prepared by the Medical
Council of India, in consultation with various authorities, and sub·
mitted to the Court.

The Court considered the said Scheme along with objections and,
by its order dated July 21, 1986 approved the Scheme and the syllabus
E with modifications and the States were directed to bring their syllabi for
the 12th year in line with the syllabus approved by this Court. The
Central Board of Secondary Education was directed to hold the All
.,,_
India Entrance Examination. The Scheme was intended to be imple·
mented from the 1985·86 academic session but was deferred to 1986·87 ).
academic session and later to 1987-88 academic session.
F
The revised Schemes in accordance with the Court's directions
were not placed before the Court for confirmation/finalisation in the
manner indicated by the Court and when the concerned authorities
proceeded with making necessary arrangements for holding the All
India Entrance Examination, several applications were moved object·
G ing to the holding of the examination, in the absence of final clearance r
from this Court. :

On 30th April, 1987 thi~ Court restrained the States and their
respective medical colleges froin filling up the 15% reserved seats in the
first year MBBS course until further orders, and the States which had
H not filed their objections were directed to do so.
744
DJNESH v. MOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE 745
j Several States filed objections. The common objection was that A
more time was needed to conveniently adapt to the switch-over as con-
templated by the Scheme and, therefore, implementation of the Scheme
under the main judgment should be deferred at least for two more years.
Another objection was that the syllabus-.:urriculum of study-in some
of the States being different from the syllabus formulated under the
orders of this Court, the students would be handicapped when taking B
! the entrance examination. Yet another objection was that the medium
, -~_,, of study in the qualifying conrse being the State language, it wonld be
difficult for the students to take the All India Entrance Examination in
English.

- This Court, disposing of the objections,
c
·-r HELD: 1.1 Ours is a large country and the level of education is
not uniform throughout. Undoubtedly some States are more advanced
than others in the field of education. The idea underlying the Scheme is
to bring about a national cohesion and understanding and the Scheme
has to be looked at from that stand point. In introducing a Scheme of D
-' this type which requires a switch-over from the prevailing pattern,
there is bound to be some inconvenience. Whether it is introduced now
or two years after, it would indeed bring about a feeling of anxiety and
uncertainty till one gets used to it. This is a part of human nature.
There is general welcome to the Scheme, but there is an objection to
its implementation. The Scheme is intended to be implemented and E
if the Scheme is welcome, its implementation should also be received
--~ well. There could, therefore, be no room for objection at the thresh-
hold. [754E-F)
.... 1.2 It would be appropriate to bring the Scheme into operation
from the coming year so that all the preliminaries can be properly F
conducted and in regular course the students can seek admission to the
1988-89 session. Accordingly, the authorities will bold the examination
in June, 1988. [755C)

It may be open to the State of Punjab to apply for directions of
this Court when the Scheme is about to be implemented in case the G
~
present law and order situation continues. [7540)

1.3 As the Scheme syllabus had already been prepared, the Court
had indicated in the order of July 21, 1986 that the courses of study at
least for the 12th Class should be so changed as to fit into the syllabus.
Tile State Government should have taken immediate steps for that pur- H
746 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1987) 3 S.C.R.

pose. Now that implementation of the Scheme is being deferred till the ,:>.
A ' next session, a gap of almost two years would have intervened between
the earlier order of the Court and the time when the Scheme would be
implemented. The implementation of the Scheme cannot, therefore, be
deferrt!d any further beyond the coming session. [753A, CJ

B 1.4 The medium of study of the MBBS course being in English, 1
those students who propose to study the MBBS have got to be reason-
ably proficient in that language. Besides, the manner in which the 'y ·
entrance examination would be held does not require long answers to be
written so that proficiency in English should become an absolute neces·
sity so far as that examination Itself is concerned. [753E-F)

c 1.S By the time the Scheme is put into operation in 1988-89 ses-
sion, all the States would have four years of notice of the judgment
proposing the switch-over to the Scheme. Four years' period is certainly
sufficient notice and no one can have any occasion to feel aggrieved that
there is any hustling up in the implementation of the Scheme. [752F)
0
1.6 In view of the direction that the Scheme should be operative
from the 1988-89 academl\: session, the order of injunction regarding
the 15% seats is recalled. The respective institutions are now free to fill
up these vacancies in accordance with their own procedure of
admission. [7SSF)
E
1987.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Civil Misc. Petition No. 7667 of

IN
---
Writ Petitions Nos. 348-352 of 1985.
F
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).

Madan Lokur for the Petitioners.

G. Viswanatha Iyer and P.K. Pillai for the State of Kerala.
G
J.R. Das and D.K. Sinha for the State of West Bengal.

A.K. Ganguli and Mariarputham for the State of Himachal Pradesh.

ff D.N. Dwivedi,_R.P. Srivastava. Mrs. Halida Khatun and Ms. A.
Subhashini for the Union of India. -
DINESH v. MOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEG)': 747

.J. P.H. Parekh, E.K. Jose, Mrs. S. Dikshit, A.V. Rangam R. Rana, M. A
Veerappa, B.R. Agarwal, B.D. Sharma, R.C. Verma, C.V. Subba
Rao, D.K. Sinha, J.R. Dass, M.E. Sardhana, S.K. Nandy, A.S.
Bhasme, A.M. Khanwilkar, P.P. Singh, R.K. Mehta, T.V.S.N. Chari,
A.K. Sanghi, M.N. Shroff, D. Goburdhan, Suryakant, H.K. Puri,
M.K.D. Namboodiry, B.P. Singh, K. Ramkumar, E.M.S. Anam, T.V.
Ratnam, L.R. Singh, D.R. Agarwal, R.S. Sodhi, Mrs. Sushma Suri, B
A. Subba Rao, Prabir Choudhary, D.N. Mukharjee, S.K. Mehta,
M.K. Garg, P. Parmeshwarn, M. Karanjawala, L.K. Pandey, K.
Rajindera Choudhary, P.C. Kapur, Pramod Swarup, T. Sridharan,
Rajesh, N.M. Ghatate, Ravi P. Wadhvani, S.K. Gambhir ,and
- D.N. Mishra for the Interveners.
c
The following Order of the Court was delivered by

ORDER

On June 22, 1984, a three·Jud~e Bench to which one of us was.a
party delivered the judgment in a group of writ petitions and while D
disapproving of the prevailing wholesale reservation on different
scores in regard to admission of students into ~edical courses of study
such as M.B.B.S. and Post Graduate specialities, proceeded to
observe that "the very mandate of the equality clause viewed in the
perspective of social justice would justify some extent of reservation
based upon residence requirement within the State or on institutional E
preferences for students passing the qualifying examination." One of
the considerations-perhaps the primary one-in formulating the
scheme for creating a national forum for choice of candidates for the
~· reserved seats-was the growth of a broad-based national approach as
against the prevailing State-based reservationist policy.
F
The Judgment was delivered during the long vacation of the
court perhaps with the fond hope that the scheme evolved by this
Court could be implemented in the educational session to follow. This
Court had not then assessed what magnitude the task of implementa-
tion of the scheme would involve.
G
When the scheme did not become operative even in the following
year (1985-86), this Court directed the Government of India to
convene a meeting in which Medical faculties of universities, Health
Secretaries of State Governments, representatives of the Medical
Council of India, the Dental Council of India, National Board of
Examinations, National Academy of Medical Sciences, the Central 'H
748 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1987] 3 S.C.R.

A Board of Secondary Education and representatives pf the Ministries of
Education and Law were to participate with a view to scrutinising and
giving shape to the scheme prepared by the Medical Council of India
under orders of this Court and finalise every detail regarding the hold-
ing of the All India Entrance Examination for the MBBS/BDS and
Post Graduate Courses. This meeting was held on September 16, 1985,
B and after deliberations a shape was given.

The resultant scheme and certain objections came to be dealt by
this Court in its order dated July 21, 1986. By this order the reserva-
tion of 30% indicated in the main judgment was reduced to 15% of the
total seats for MBBS course in each medical college or institution
C without taking into account any reservations validly made and this
Court observed:-

"This new formula is in our opinion fair and just and
brings about real equality of opportunity in admissions to
the MBBS/BDS course without placing the students in one
D State in an advantageous or disadvantageous position as ~
compared to the students in another State."

This Court dealt at length with the objections to the syllabus and
ultimately said:-

E "We approve of the syllabus since it has been
accepted by the Medical Council of India, the Government ----k-
of India and all the State Governments except the State of
Maharashtra which also did not make any submissions to
the Court at the hearing of this case." '..

F This Court further said:-

"Since as a result of the direction given by us on 2nd
May, 1986, our judgment dated 22nd June, 1984, is going
to be operative only with effect from the academic year
commencing in 1987 and the first All India Entrance
G Examination for admission to the MBBS/BDS course k
would be held only in June, 1987, we would request the
Education C/epartment of each State as also the Board of
Secondary and/or Higher Secondary Education in each
State to take note of this syllabus which we have approved
for the All India Entrance Examination and to suitably
H amend its syllabus or course for the 12th year (perhaps class)
DINESH v. MOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE 749

so as to bring it in line with the syllabus approved by us so A
that the students passing the qualifying examination of the
12th class may be properly equipped to face the All India
Entrance Examination. It would be desirable if a common
syllabus is adbpted at +2 level throughout the country so
that there may be uniformity in the educational pattern and
the students in various States may be able to appear in the B
All India Entrance Examination on a footing of equality
without any undue advantage to one as against the other."

By the same order, the Court held that the Central Board of

- Secondary Education would be the agency to conduct the All India
Entrance Examination for admission to the MBBS course. It was
further clarified that the scheme in the main judgment as modified
c
later is meant to apply to medical colleges or institutions maintained or
run by the Union of India, any State Government or Municipal or
Local Authority. That order also directed that:-

"All India Entrance Examination for MBBS/BDS course D
shall be held once in a year which may commence at any
time between 15th July amt 1st August each year. The
dates indicated in paragraph 14 of the Scheme of All India
Entrance Examinlltion for MBBS/BDS course are quite in
order but we would add one more date, namely, that the
result of the All India Entrance Examination shall be E
declared sometime between the 15th and the 20th June. A
list of successful candidates shall be prepared in order of
merit and it shall comprise the names of as many students
as the number of vacant seats available for admission plus
10% more and there shall also be a waiting list as indicated
in paragraph 8 of the scheme. There shall also be an inter- F
val of time of at least three weeks between the date of
publication of the list and the date of admission to the
medical colleges or institutions covered by the scheme."

There is an apparent mistake in the working schedule in this part of
that order. If the examination is to be held between July 15 and August G
I, the result cannot be declared between the 15th and the 20th of June.
We clarify this apparent error by directing that the examination shall
be held between 16th May and 3 lst May and the results shall be
notified between 15th and 20th June. The list of the candidates as
directed in that order will be prepared within one week from the
publication of the results and three weeks' time shall be allowed to H

....
750 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1987) 3 s. C:R.

A intervene before actual admission starts. By the end of August such ·).._
process having been completed, actual teaching should start from the
beginning of September. In all medical colleges/institutions to which
the scheme applies, teaching for MBBS/BDS course should start on
the first working day of September and even those institutions which
B are outside the scheme might as well commence their academic ses-
sions from September so that throughout the country there would be ~
uniformity in that regard. In that order, this Court further held:-

"The schemes of examination for admission to
MBBS/BDS course .......... are therefore approved by

c
us, subject to the various modifications discussed and
formulated in this judgment. We would direct the Govern-
ment of India to revise these schemes in accordance with
-
the modifications directed in this judgment and to submit
such revised schemes to this Court within two weeks from
today. The Government of India will supply copies of the
D revised schemes to the learned advocates appearing on
behalf of the State Governments, the Medical Council of
India and the Bombay University so that if the revised
schemes are not in accordance with the directions given by
us in this judgment in any respect, they may be able to
point out such discrepancies in the revised schemes."
E
The Writ Petitions were directed to be placed for hearing on 4th
of August, 1986, for confirmation of the revised schemes prepared by
the Government of India in accordance with the directions given in
that judgment. The revised schemes were not placed for finalisation

F
before the Court in the manner directed but ultimately the concerned
authorities proceeded with the making of arrangements for holding of
,_.
the All India Entrance Examination. At that stage, several applica-
tions were moved objecting to the holding of the examination in the
absence of a final clearance from this Court. In that order of 21st July,
1986, this Court had directed:-

"We would like to make it clear that students shall be
G
entitled to appear at the All India Entrance Examination )v
even if the result of the qualifying examination has not yet
been declared, provided they have appeared at the qualify-
ing examination but they cannot be admitted to the MBBS/
BDS course unless they have passed the qualifying exami-
H nation."
DINESH v. MOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE 751

In the advertisement which was given calling for applications from A
candidates seeking admission to the entrance examination, eligibility
was limited to successful candiates in the qualifying examination and
the above direction of this Court was not reflected there. On 30th of
April, 1987, this Court made the following order:-

} "We understand that notice of the Scheme has been B
served on all the States. Some of the States have filed their
objections to the proposed Scheme. The remaining States
may file their objections by June 15, 1987 latest. The
Registry of this Court will serve a copy of this Order on the

- Chief Secretary of each State to enable those States who
have not filed objections to do so by the aforesaid date. C
Those States who do not have. a copy of the Scheme with
them will apply to the Registry within time for such copy. It
is distinctly understood that no further time will be allowed
to any State for filing objections. The Union of India will
file its response to those objections by July 10, 1987. The
matter shall be listed on July 14, 1987 for final disposal. D
\!eanwhile, the examination scheduled for May 3, 1987
shall stand postponed. The postponement of the examina-
tion shall be notified publicly in all prominent newspapers,
the All India Radio and Doordarshan immediately.

We also restrain the States and their respective E
medical Colleges from filling up 15% of the seats in the
First Year M .B .B .S. Course ............... until further
orders."

In compliance with the said direction, the objections filed by the vari-
ous States have been placed before us which are being disposed of by F
this order. The States which have filed their objections are the
following:-

(1) Assam
(2) Goa
G
(3) Gujarat
(4) Haryana
(5) Karnataka
(6) Kerala H
752 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1987] 3 S.C.R.

A (7) Orissa
(8) Punjab
(9) Rajasthan
(10) TamilNadu
B (11) U ttar Pradesh
(12) West Bengal.

Apart from these States, the Bombay Municipal Corporation has sent
some objections to the scheme.

c Most of the States had a common objection, namely, some more
time is needed to conveniently adapt to the switch-over as contemp-
lated by the scheme and, therefore, implementation of the Scheme
under the main judgment should be deferred at least for two more
years. We have already pointed out that the Scheme was intended to
0 be enforced in 1985-86 academic session and when it was deferred to
the next year, the Court was hopeful that it could be introduced in the
academic session of 1986-87. We have indicated at length by quoting
from the order of July 21, 1986, how u.nder adverse circumstances it
was not possible to enforce it in that academic session but the Court
felt assured that the Scheme would be operative in the current

--
E academic session, namely, of 1987-88. Even in April, 1987 when in-
junction against filling the 15% of the seats was directed, this Court
seems to have still been hopeful of the working out the Scheme in this
sessiorn. For reasons which we shall indicate presently, it is not possible
to enforce the Scheme in the current academic session of 1987-88. By
the time the Scheme is put into operation in 1988-89 Session, all States
would have four years of notice of this judgment proposing the switch-
F
over to the Scheme. Four years' period is certainly sufficient notice
and no one can have any occasion to feel aggrieved that there is any
hustling up in the implementation of the Scheme. We are, therefore,
not impressed at all by the stand taken in the objections that more time
isl necessary for implementing the Scheme and. therefore, its
implementation should be deferred until 1990.
G
The next objection which most of the States have· voiced is that
the syllabus-<:urriculum of study-in some of these States being diffe-
rent from the syllabus formulated under the orders of this Court, the
students would be handicapped when taking the entrance examina-
h lion. Here again we see no force. We have extracted at considerable
length from a part of the order of July 21, 1986, where this aspect was
DINESH v. MOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE 753

) in the mind of the Court and as the Scheme syllabus was already A
prepared, the Court indicated that the courses of study at least for the
12th Class should be so changed as to fit into the syllabus. The State
Governments should have taken immediate steps for that purpose.
Now that we are deferring the implementation of the scheme till the
next session, a gap of almost two years would have intervened between
the earlier order of the Court and the time when the Scheme would be B
f implemented. Those States who have not taken steps to bring their
syllabi in line with the Scheme syllabus must be blamed for indiffer-
-~
ence but there is still time to remedy the situation. Such of the students
who propose to sit at the entrance examination must from now on

- undertake an extended study of the subjects covered by the syllabus in
case some portions from the approved scheme syllabus are not covered c
by their own. We do not consider this objection as a valid one for
deferring the implementation of the Scheme any further beyond the
coming session.

On behalf of some of the States like Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu,
it was pointed out that the medium of study in the qualifying course D
_.( being the State language, it would be difficult for the students to take
the All India Entrance Examination in English. This is not the first
time this objection has been raised. Even on an earlier occasion, it was
claimed that the entrance examination should be held by adopting
' regional or State languages. On this count, the Court had indicated the
reasons and had refused to accept that request. We do not think there E
is any justification to take a different view of the situation. We would
- ~ reiterate that the medium of study of the MBBS Course being in
English, those students who propose to study the MBBS have got to be
reasonably proficient in that language. Besides, the manner in which
'-< the entrance examination would be held, does not require long ans-
wers to be written so that proficiency in English should become an F
absolute necessity so far as that examination itself is concerned. In
these circumstances we do not see any real force in the objection'
relating to the language of the examination.

On behalf of the State of Assam, a plea was raised that the
enforcement of the Scheme should be deferred for a period of five G
....; years. By way of justification for such a request, it was maintained that
the State has suffered badly on account of the continuous agitation for
about three to four years and during this period, the educational in-
stitutions were mostly closed and the State is still in a process of
recovery. It is a fact that the State passed through a period of agitational
cloud but we do not think there would be any justification to keep the H
754 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1987) 3 S.C.R

A State out from the national stream. It is quite possible that for the first
year or two, some inconvenience may be experienced but we are sure,
the young students from Assam would maintain high spirits and would
match up to the national standards for competition in respect of the
15% seats. We are of the view that it would be in the interest of the
State of Assam to quickly join the national stream.
B
A similar request has been made on behalf of the State of Punjab
though on different grounds. It is stated that the prevailing situation of
Jaw and order in Punjab being what it is, it may be difficult for students
from outside Punjab to be in Punjab for pursuing their courses of

C
studies in the MBBS and equally unfavourably would be the position
for youngsters from Punjab to go out to other institutions located in
different parts of the country. We cannot shut our eyes to the realities
-
of the situation but there is still almost a year for the Scheme to be
implemented and we hope the present situation would not continue so
Jong. In case the present situation continues, it may be open to the
State of Punjab to apply for directions of this Court when the Scheme
D is about to be implemented. For the present we reject the request of
the Punjab State.

Ours is a large country and the level of education is not uniform
throughout. Undoubtedly some States are more advanced than otlier:s
in the field of education. The idea underlying the Scheme is to bring
E about a national cohesion and understanding and the.Scheme has to be
looked at from that stand point. In introducing a Scheme of this type
which requires a switch-over from the prevailing pattern, there is
bound to be some inconvenience. Whether it is introduced now or two
years after, would indeed bring about a feeling of anxiety and uncer,
tainty till one gets used to it. This is a part of human nature. We have
F found a general welcome to the Scheme but an objection to its
implementation. The Scheme is intended to be implemented and if the
Scheme is welcome, its implementation should also be received weU.
There could, therefore, be no room for objection at the threash-hold.

Now that the objections are not entertained and the Scheme is
G finalised-and the syllabus was earlier approved-all formalities for
the holding of the examination are complete. ~

The next question is as to when should the examination be held.
Learned counsel for the Union of India as also the Indian Medical
Council suggested that it could be done in October this year so that the
H candidates selected at the entrance examination could join the 1987-88
DINESH v. MOTILAL NEHRU MEDICAL COLLEGE 755

Session from November. In most of the colleges, admission in respect A
of 85% seats has been completed and actual teaching has either begun
or is about to begin. By November a substantial part of the course
would have been read. To meet the situation, learned counsel for the
Union of India suggested that we should direct the colleges and institu-
tions to have a supplementary course for the students admitted against.
> the 15% vacancies. In the absence of consent from the institutions, it B
would be difficult to work out that. As it is, there exists a lot of
confusion in the field and we do not propose to add to it by giving a
direction of the type proposed. On the other hand it would be
appropriate to bring the Scheme into operation from the coming year
so that all the preliminaries can be properly conducted and in regular
course the students can seek admission to the 1988-89 Session. We C
accordingly direct the authorities to hold the examination in the man-
ner directed, in June, 1988. The Union of India, the Medical Council,
the Dental Council, the several States, Universities and Medical
Colleges or institutions who are covered by the Scheme are directed to
comply with these orders in time so as to give full effect to what has
been said here. D

We have no intention to accept any application for further
modification or alteration of our orders except in regard to the State of
Punjab to the extent we have indicated in this order. We had pui the
parties appearing before us to notice of our intention and we reiterate
it in our present order that no such application shall be entertained. E
_ .,,- We hope and trust that all concerned would cooperate in giving an
easy workable switch-over to the Scheme to be implemented in the
1988-89 academic session so far as the MBBS/BDS course is con-
"-.- cerned. In view of our directing the Scheme to be operative from the
1988-89 academic session, the order of injunction passed on 20th of
April, 1987, regarding the 15% seats is recalled. The respective institu- F
tions are now free to fill up these vacancies in accordance with their
own procedure of admission.

A copy of this order shall be communicated forthwith by the
Registry to the Chief Secretary of every State and or Union Territory
....i,: as the case may be. G

N.P.V.