Electricity Act 2003 | Section 56(2) Does Not Preclude Licensee From Raising Supplementary Demand After Two Years; Only Restricts Right To Disconnect: Supreme Court Dissolution Of Partnership At Will | Outgoing Partner Entitled To Market Value Of Assets As On Date Of Distribution, Not Date Of Dissolution: Supreme Court SEBI | Release Of Escrow Under Buyback Regulations Does Not Preclude Independent Inquiry Into Fraud Under PFUTP Regulations: Supreme Court Promotion Based On Merit Does Not Wipe Out Past Adverse Records But Must Be Balanced In FR 56(j) Compulsory Retirement: Supreme Court Appellate Court Can Convict For Offence Even If Charge Not Framed By Trial Court Under Section 464 CrPC: Supreme Court Extradition | Sovereign Assurance Does Not Override Judicial Sentencing; Cannot Be Used To Artificially Accelerate Sentence Completion: Supreme Court Article 21 | State Has A Positive Duty To Protect Public Health By Implementing Front-Of-Package Labelling Regulations: Supreme Court Revenue Entries Are Not Documents Of Title, Cannot Replace Substantive Evidence In Property Disputes: Supreme Court Long Possession Without Hostile Animus Does Not Amount To Adverse Possession: Supreme Court Administrative Discretion Must Comply With Article 14; Subsequent Executive Decisions Cannot Retroactively Cure Failure Of Timely Performance: Supreme Court Municipal Corporation Cannot Unilaterally Downgrade Market Value Of Land Acquired For Road Widening To Deny TDR Certificates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Execution Of Agreement To Sell Does Not Automatically Terminate Existing Tenancy: Allahabad High Court Writ Jurisdiction Not Maintainable When Title To Property Is Under A Cloud And Subject Matter Of Disputed Facts: Andhra Pradesh High Court Amendment Of Plaint Seeking Impleadment Of Third Parties And Addition Of Time-Barred Claims In A Partition Suit Cannot Be Permitted: Bombay High Court Reassessment Order Does Not Result In Merger Of Original Assessment Order If Issues Are Distinct: Andhra Pradesh High Court GST Assessment Order Uploaded Only Under 'Additional Notices' Tab Without Separate Intimation Violates Principles Of Natural Justice: Calcutta High Court 'Prolonged Inaction' Cannot Be Rewarded: Delhi High Court Upholds CESTAT Refusal To Condone 968-Day Delay In Filing Customs Appeal Probate No Longer Mandatory To Establish Rights Under A Will Following 2025 Amendment To Indian Succession Act: J&K High Court Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Used To Introduce New Factual Foundations Or Reopen Concluded Arbitral Awards: Karnataka High Court High Court Cannot Invoke Article 227 To Strike Off Plaint When Statutory Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Is Available: Madras High Court Section 58 BNSS | Detention Beyond 24 Hours Without Magistrate’s Authority Vitiates Arrest And Subsequent Remand: Orissa High Court Arbitrator Is The Sole Judge Of Quality And Quantity Of Evidence, Court Cannot Act As Court Of Appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 5 Limitation Act | Court Cannot Condone Delay In A Mechanical Manner Without Ascertaining Bona Fides Of The Applicant: Calcutta High Court High Court Cannot Quash FIR Under Section 482 CrPC By Conducting Mini-Trial On Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court Taxation Law | Mere Assertion Of Natural Justice Violation On Disputed Facts Won't Bypass Statutory Appeal: Delhi High Court

P&H High Court - Grants OCI Students Equal Access to MBBS Course Under General Category

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a groundbreaking ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh, delivered a verdict in favor of Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) students seeking admission to the MBBS Course under the General Category. The court declared that OCI card holders are entitled to the same benefits as Indian citizens for MBBS admissions, dispelling the restrictions that confined them to the NRI Quota.

Chief Justice Ravi Shanker Jha and Justice Arun Palli presided over the case of Aqeeq Mann, a minor represented by his father, who petitioned against the denial of access to the General Category despite securing a rank in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET)-2023.

"OCI candidates are entitled to the same benefits, that are being given to the NRI candidates... the notification... providing that OCI card holders would be eligible for admission against the seats reserved for NRI candidates only, has been quashed." (Paragraph 4)

The petition, filed against Clause 17 (vi) of the impugned notification issued by the Government of Punjab, Department of Medical & Research (Health-III Branch), contended that such restrictions were illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of constitutional provisions.

"The authorities have not examined and decided the issues raised by the petitioner in the petition... appropriate orders be passed." (Paragraph 5)

Highlighting a previous Supreme Court ruling in the case of Anushka Rengunthwar & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., which granted parity to OCI candidates with NRI candidates, the petitioner sought equal opportunities under the General Category.

Recognizing the urgency of the matter, the court directed the concerned authorities to decide on the petitioner's case immediately, considering all aspects and NEET-related guidelines.

The landmark judgment paves the way for OCI students aspiring to pursue MBBS in the State of Punjab, allowing them equal access to the General Category seats and ensuring a fair and equitable admission process.

The ruling has significant implications for OCI students across the country, emphasizing equal opportunities in higher education and upholding the principles of equality enshrined in the Constitution of India.

Date Of Decision: 20th July 2023

 

Aqeeq Mann (minor) through his father and natural guardian vs State of Punjab and others        

Latest Legal News