Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

OCI Card Holders Eligible for PG Medical Seat Admission,” Says Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the eligibility of Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card holders for admission to Post Graduate (PG) medical seats. The bench comprising of Justice A. Verma and Justice S. Kapoor delivered the verdict on 15th July 2023, addressing the rights of OCI card holders in seeking medical education opportunities.

The judgment revolves around a writ petition filed by a candidate who challenged the change of her status from an OCI candidate to an Indian national for PG medical seat admission. The petitioner sought relief under Article 32 of the Constitution, highlighting the critical issue of eligibility based on OCI status.

The Ministry of Home Affairs’ notification dated 04.03.2021, which withdrew certain privileges and eligibility criteria for OCI card holders, came under scrutiny. The Court observed, “The notification had a retroactive impact, altering the rights of OCI card holders in a manner that affected their eligibility for examinations like NEET.”

Citing the Court’s findings in the Anushka Rengunthwar case, the judgment emphasized the interpretation of the notification’s retroactive application. The Court ruled on the applicability of the notification to OCI card holders born before its issuance date, ensuring clarity on the matter.

The petitioner’s eligibility was examined based on her OCI status, and the Court directed that her eligibility be reconsidered for the remaining counseling rounds for PG medical seats. The directive emphasized the inclusion of OCI card holders who were issued cards before the notification’s implementation.

“The judgment reflects the Court’s commitment to ensuring equal opportunities for OCI card holders pursuing medical education in India,” remarked the bench. The ruling underscores the importance of fair and non-discriminatory treatment for OCI card holders, ensuring that their eligibility is considered on par with Indian nationals.

This landmark decision big relief for OCI card holders aspiring to pursue medical education in India, offering a renewed hope for equal educational opportunities.

D.D-01.09.2023.

PALLAVI vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.  

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/01-Sep-2023_Malikarjun_Vs_Vipin.pdf"]

Latest Legal News