NEET-PG 2021 Counselling: Supreme Court Upholds No Special Stray Round for Vacant Seats
The Supreme Court recently ruled on the dispute concerning unfilled seats in the NEET-PG 2021 admissions process in the case of Dr. Astha Goel & Ors. v. The Medical Counselling Committee & Ors.. The petitioners, a group of medical graduates, sought a Special Stray Round of Counselling for approximately 1,456 vacant postgraduate medical seats. They contended that leaving these seats unfilled would be a waste of medical education resources when there were willing and eligible candidates.
The Supreme Court dismissed the plea, stating that allowing additional rounds of counselling would compromise the integrity of the admission process and disrupt the academic schedule. The Court ruled that the NEET-PG counselling process had already undergone multiple rounds, and further extensions would undermine the set admission framework.
Background of the Case
The petitions were filed by medical graduates who had participated in the NEET-PG 2021 counselling process but had not secured admission. The dispute arose after multiple rounds of counselling, leaving 1,456 seats vacant. The petitioners sought a directive from the Supreme Court to the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) to conduct a Special Stray Round for these unfilled seats.
The cases included:
- Writ Petition (C) No. 409 of 2022: Filed by Dr. Astha Goel and others.
- Writ Petition (C) No. 393 of 2022: Filed by Dr. Atharv Tungatkar and others.
- Special Leave Petition (C) No. 10395 of 2022: Filed by Dr. Nikhil Arora.
- Special Leave Petition (C) No. 10539 of 2022: Filed by Dr. Khundongbam Chetan.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioners argued that allowing the vacant seats to remain unfilled was:
- Unfair to aspiring doctors, who were willing to accept any vacant seats, regardless of location or institution.
- Detrimental to medical institutions, as seats were available but remained unallocated.
- Caused by an abrupt addition of extra seats and software errors in previous rounds, which justified an additional round.
- Unjustified because many of the unfilled seats were in clinical courses, contradicting the government’s claim that only non-clinical seats were left.
- Avoidable, as the government could have developed a mechanism to allocate these seats even after the closure of the software used for seat allotment.
- Not a burden, since many students had not registered for NEET-PG 2022, believing that they would secure a seat in the 2021 cycle.
Respondent’s Arguments
The Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) and the Union of India opposed the petitions, arguing that:
- Nine rounds of counselling had already been conducted, including an additional round due to a previous Supreme Court order.
- Out of 40,000 seats, only 1,456 remained vacant, and the majority were non-clinical, which generally go unfilled each year.
- Conducting another round would delay NEET-PG 2022 admissions, disrupting the entire medical academic calendar.
- Many vacant seats were in private colleges with high fees, making them unattractive even if another round was held.
- Once the counselling software was closed, it was not feasible to reopen it for additional seat allotment.
Key Observations of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of maintaining the integrity of the counselling schedule and dismissed the petitions. The Court observed:
“The process of admission, especially in medical education, cannot be endless. It must end at a particular point of time. The time schedule has to be adhered to, otherwise, ultimately, it may affect medical education and public health.”
The Court cited past judgments, including:
- Supreet Batra v. Union of India (2003): Holding that students cannot be admitted mid-term even if some seats remain vacant.
- Education Promotion Society for India v. Union of India (2019): Noting that non-clinical seats often remain vacant every year, and extending admissions is not justified.
Final Judgment and Directions
The Supreme Court issued the following key rulings:
- The plea for a Special Stray Round of counselling was dismissed.
- The vacant seats would not be filled, as the admission process had already ended.
- The academic schedule of NEET-PG 2022 would proceed without disruption.
- The ruling emphasized that extending the process could compromise the quality of medical education and public health.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s ruling in this case reaffirms the importance of adhering to the admission schedule in medical education. While acknowledging the concerns of the petitioners, the Court ruled that keeping the process structured was more critical than filling every last seat. This judgment sets a precedent that admissions should not be extended indefinitely at the cost of disrupting the medical academic calendar.
The ruling also highlights the reality that certain non-clinical seats in medical colleges remain vacant every year due to low demand. The Court’s decision ensures that NEET-PG 2022 admissions proceed without delay, preventing further disruptions to medical education in India.
Petitioner Name: Dr. Astha Goel & Ors..Respondent Name: The Medical Counselling Committee & Ors..Judgment By: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice Aniruddha Bose.Place Of Incident: India.Judgment Date: 10-06-2022.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: dr.-astha-goel-&-ors-vs-the-medical-counsell-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-10-06-2022.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Education Related Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in Judgment by Aniruddha Bose
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments June 2022
See all petitions in 2022 judgments
See all posts in Service Matters Category
See all allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Service Matters Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Service Matters Category
