NEET PG applicants have petitioned the Kerala High Court to overturn the SEBC reservation of 27%

A group of MBBS graduates who took the National Eligibility Cumulation Entrance Test (NEET) for postgraduate (PG) medical courses have petitioned the Kerala High Court to overturn a state government circular increasing reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) in such courses from 9% to 27%. (Dr. Sreeparvathy & Ors. v Commissioner of Entrance Examinations & Anr.).

The petition was heard in detail today by Justice N Nagaresh, who adjourned it till tomorrow since it must be decided before PG medical admissions can begin.

The petitioners’ senior attorney, Sukumaran, briefed the Court that numerous comparable cases are already pending before the Supreme Court.

At this point, Justice Nagaresh instructed the petitioners to confirm whether the matter is identical, and if it is, the case should not be heard by the High Court.

The petitioners came to the Court to challenge a recent modification of the number of seats allotted for various categories of applicants for admission to PG medical programmes in the State, which they claimed breached constitutional principles.

There are a total of 833 seats available for PG programmes, with 427 seats filled from the Commissioner of Entrance Exams’ rank list. Until last year, 9% of these seats in Kerala were designated for SEBC candidates.

The Kerala government, however, issued a Government Order (GO) on October 20, 2021, amending the reservation pattern by creating a 10% service quota reservation and boosting the SEBC reservation from 9% to 27%.

When the reserve for other classes, including disabled people, is taken into account, the petitioners claim that the merit seats for general candidates are reduced to 38%.

The petition, submitted by attorney S Sujin, stated that the Supreme Court has declared in several instances that reservations at the specialised (PG) level must be modest.

The petitioners’ main argument was that the new GO goes against the language and spirit of Supreme Court precedents, notably those cases where it was decided that such reservations would be harmful to the national interest and lead to dilution of merit at the specialty level.

In Indra Sawhney v Union of India, the Supreme Court issued a plethora of instructions while upholding the Central Government’s introduction of a 27 percent quota for backward classes in 1990. The court ruled that if the present SEBC reservation of 9% was insufficient for a particular state, the state government must furnish information, according to the petition.

This ruling was followed by the Supreme Court in a number of other cases, notably Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil v The Chief Minister & Ors., in which the Supreme Court dismissed the claim to Maratha reservation, citing Indra Sawhney’s directive that the reservation ceiling in a State cannot exceed 50%.

However, it was alleged that the Kerala government issued the GO in violation of the Supreme Court’s instructions, essentially increasing reserved seats beyond 50 percent.

Furthermore, it was pointed out that the new GO provided no explanations or justifications for increasing the SEBC reservation from 9% to 27%.

Furthermore, it is said that the situation in Kerala is unique when compared to other states because SEBC candidates are sufficiently represented within the merit quota as well.

As a result, the petitioners asked for the GO to be quashed and for orders to be granted to the respondents to create the selection list for admission to PG courses for the 2020-21 academic year without regard to the GO.

Several challenges are currently pending in the Supreme Court, challenging the 27 percent reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBC) and the 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Section in all-India quota seats for postgraduate medical programmes.

The Central government informed the Supreme Court on October 25 that NEET PG course counselling would not begin till the case was decided by the top court.