An attempt by the Gujarat government to reserve seats in private medical colleges for non-resident Gujaratis was struck down by the High Court as it goes against the constitution.
By Kaushik Joshi
Regionalism has come to the fore in admissions to medical colleges in Gujarat. Thankfully, in an order dated September 7, 2015, the Gujarat High Court declared invalid a rule framed by the state government to give priority to non-resident Gujaratis (NRGs) for admission to self-financed (private) medical colleges there.
The division bench of acting Chief Justice Jayant Patel and Justice NV Anjaria quashed and set aside sub-clause (i) of clause (4) of sub-rule C of rule 7 of the Gujarat Professional Medical Education Courses (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees), (Amendment) Rules, 2015. The petitioner was Kolsani Sai Yaswanath Reddy from Andhra Pradesh, but being a minor, it was filed by his father, Kolsani Venkata Nagi Reddy.
FOUR CATEGORIES
The petitioner challenged the following order of categories framed by the government for admission to self-financed colleges:
Merit list of genuine NRIs who are domiciled in Gujarat
Merit list of genuine NRIs who are not domiciled in Gujarat
Merit list of dependant NRIs who are domiciled in Gujarat
Merit list of dependant NRIs who are not domiciled in Gujarat
Gunvant Thakar, advocate for the petitioner, argued that giving reservation for NRIs domiciled in Gujarat was violative of Article 14 of the constitution, besides Article 15(1) and Article 29(2). Article 14 of the constitution says: “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territories of India. Article 15 (1) provides that there shall be no discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.”
The petitioner posed some valid questions: Were the four categories based on intelligible differentia, can the concept of NRI and domicile of Gujarat be grouped together and can categorization have a rational nexus with the objects sought to be achieved.
A division bench of acting Chief Justice Jayant Patel(L) and Justice NV Anjaria(R) quashed sub-clause (i) of clause (4) of sub-rule C of rule 7 of Gujarat Professional Medical Education Courses Rules, 2015.
In its verdict, the court observed that “observance of merit criteria for the purpose of admission is in itself ensuring the equality clause and adherence to the tenets of Article 14. In all admissions, especially to the higher courses, the object sought to be achieved is maintaining the merit order. Therefore, any rule of mechanism flowing from the provisions of law or rules which have a tendency of compromising with merit selection cannot be said to have rational nexus with the object intended to be achieved.”
WHERE IS THE MERIT?
The court further ruled that the very basis of these categorizations is not only a mismatch to the NRI category seat quota, but operates mischievously vis-a-vis a desired order of merit to be observed for admission of students in the courses. In essence, it said that the rule in question, to the extent it provides for domicile of the state as the basis and the categories devised on those criteria for the preparation of merit list, is violative of Article 14 and therefore, ultra vires. The court ordered the government to delete the words “who are domiciled in Gujarat” in these categories. Following this order, the merit list will now be prepared in the following order: Merit list of genuine NRIs and merit list of dependant NRIs.
After deletion of the words, “who are domiciled in Gujarat”, the merit list will now be made in the following order: Merit list of genuine NRIs and merit list of dependant NRIs.
Meanwhile, the advocate-general for Gujarat prayed that the judgment be stayed for some time to enable the state to move the higher court. The court rejected this and ordered that “the matter pertains to admission process in a medical faculty and the same should not be deferred, as it may result into wastage of an academic year for the students concerned”.
Thakar, the advocate for the petitioner, did not mince words while arguing against the amended rule. He said: “Priority to NRGs (non-resident Gujaratis) in crucial matters like medical admission would be gross injustice to meritorious students. Making such a rule amounts to parochialism and discrimination.”
Even students were against this move of the Gujarat government. Dr Vijay Nakum, a pediatrics resident at Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad, said: “Some political or bureaucratic whim often comes into play during such exams and the students have to suffer. This year it is the NRG (non-resident Gujarati) over NRIs. Do they realize how agonizing it is for the students?”
AGAINST STATUTE
Kolsani Venkata Nagi Reddy, the father of the petitioner, said: “The amended rule was clearly a denial of admission to meritorious students from other states of India. The classification in favor of NRGs is based on territorial consideration which goes against the constitution. It is utterly discriminatory. To provide for reservation on the ground of place of birth is not tenable. Therefore we had to challenge it.”
But what do NRGs feel about this verdict? Roshan Shah, an NRG from Canada, cautiously said: “Per se it seems to amount to discrimination against other NRIs. More so, in matters of academic merit. There is no basis for it except a narrow, parochial outlook. NRGs who have settled abroad do not contribute to the economy here in India. If this aims at checking brain-drain, it won’t work as NRG medicos have their eyes on greener pastures abroad.” Shah even advocates mandatory social service in rural areas for all medicos just like conscription in Singapore.
However, Pinakin Pandya, 55, an NRG settled in the US, supports the government move. “Many of us NRGs contribute liberally towards rural development in their native places. Besides, they also chip in at times of natural calamities. So, why shouldn’t they enjoy certain privileges?” he argued.
Harikrishna Barot, 70, a retired bank employee and an NRG, said: “Why shouldn’t NRGs be considered for privileges? Whenever the state government issues an appeal for donations in times of floods or earthquakes, NRGs have contributed generously.”
The Gujarat High Court order comes as a relief to students of other states who seek admission to medical courses in self-financed medical institutions in Gujarat. Let’s face it: Being an Indian is more important than sticking to narrow, parochial boundaries.