Supreme Court directs Centre and states to scrap quotas in super-speciality medical courses

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the central government and all states to make sure that super-speciality medical courses are kept “unreserved, open and free” following complaints that some states were allowing only domiciled MBBS doctors to appear for entrance exams. The Supreme Court held that national interest requires doing away with all forms of reservation in institutions of higher education, and urged the Centre to take effective steps “objectively”. Coming against the backdrop of how political parties are using the quota word to polarise voters in the ongoing Bihar Assembly Elections, this directive is a huge contrast to how reservation is used in votebank politics with populism at its core. [caption id=“attachment_2471634” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Supreme Court of India/ Reuters[/caption] Justices Dipak Misra and P.C. Pant said there should not be any form of reservation in such courses on the basis of caste, religion, residence or other criteria. The Telegraph reports that the bench cited the case of Dr Pradeep Jain versus the Union of India and others. In this example, the Supreme Court in 1984 said merit was the sole criterion when it came to super-speciality medical courses. But the government has not framed any rules or guidelines to implement the directive yet, it said. “In the Dr Pradeep Jain case this court… observed that in super specialities there should really be no reservation. This is… for improving the standard of higher education and thereby… the quality of available medical services…,” Justice Misra, who wrote the judgment, observed. “We hope and trust that the Government of India and the state governments shall seriously consider this aspect… without delay and appropriate guidelines shall be evolved by the Indian Medical Council so as to keep the super specialities… unreserved, open and free.” The judgment came based on a batch petitions filed by some MBBS doctors who complained about eligibility criteria for admissions to certain courses - DM (Doctor of Medicine) and MCh (Master of Chirurgiae)- in particular, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Tamil Nadu permitted only those domiciled in these states. This means that while candidates domiciled in these states can sit for exams in other states, students from other states are barred from taking exams in these states. The petitioners said this went against constitutional provisions like Articles 14 (equality before law) and 16 (equality of opportunity in public employment, education, etc.). The bench said it cannot interfere with the admission process in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana since a Presidential Order has created an exception and the constitutionality of this Order had not been challenged. But it agreed to examine on November 4 whether Tamil Nadu could do the same and allow this form of reservation in a post-graduate programme, reports The Indian Express. The Supreme Court noted that “privilege remains unchanged” even after 68 years of independence and said that national interest requires doing away with all forms of reservation in institutions of higher education, and urged the Centre to take effective steps “objectively”. The bench said the central and state governments have been given several reminders to change status quo and make merit the primary criteria for admissions into super-specialty courses but the reality remains that reservation retains its stranglehold. “The fond hope has remained in the sphere of hope… The said privilege remains unchanged, as if (it is) to compete with eternity,” the bench remarked, adding that it concurs completely with what the Supreme Court had ruled in 1988 in two judgments, reports The Indian Express.