Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on June 2, the challenge to the Telangana Domicile Quota Rule for MBBS Admissions.

The bench led by CJI BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih was hearing a batch of pleas challenging the order of the Telangana High Court, which held that a permanent resident need not be required to study or reside in Telangana for 4 continuous years to get the benefit of domicile quota in medical admissions.

Today, during the hearings, Sr Adv Raghenth Basant appearing for one of the respondents informed the bench that counselling for the NEET UG 2025 admissions starts on June 14 and as per the last order of the Court, the impugned High Court decision was stayed on September 20, 2024, only till the next date of hearing. Thus, the stay had now expired and urged the Court not to extend the stay further.

The bench said that it would consider it for hearing at length on June 2.

The respondents (students) had also stressed that the present decision of the Telangana government was arbitrary towards those parents who were born and brought in Telangana but went to other states to study for the 11th and 12th and so did their children.

Sr Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan, appearing for the State Govt. reverted, "There are people who have gone out and then come back here in a sense of opportunism. We have had those who were born here but went to Dubai etc, but then want to come back and apply here"

He emphasised that the state's policy was fair and defensible. While the State of Andhra Pradesh is applying a similar policy, people "come up in arms" if the State of Telangana tries to implement the same for its medical colleges.

On the last hearing, the bench of former CJI, Justice DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra had expressed concern over the difficulty in granting the quota benefit to those candidates who, while being permanent residents of Telangana went to neighboring states for coaching purposes in the last 4 years preceding the medical exam.

Previously, the Court had stayed the impugned order while taking on record the state of Telangana that it was ready to grant a one-time exception for the petitioners who had approached the High Court.

Before the High Court, a batch of petitions challenged the validity of Rule 3(a) of Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017 (Rules 2017) which was amended by the State on July 19. The amendment was done as per G.O no.33 dated 19.7.2024.

The amended Rule 3(a) of Rules 2017 provides that a candidate seeking admission under the 'Competent Authority Quota' for local candidates must study in the State of Telangana for a period of 4 consecutive years or reside in the state for 4 years. In addition, the candidate has to pass the qualifying examination from the State of Telangana.

Background

Before the Telangana High Court, a batch of petitioners challenged the validity of Rule 3(a) of Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017 (Rules 2017) which was amended by the State on July 19.

As per the impugned provision, a candidate seeking admission under the 'Competent Authority Quota' for local candidates requires him or her to study in the State of Telangana for a period of 4 years or reside in the state for 4 years.

Notably, Rule 3(iii) provides 85% reservations to 'local candidates' for permanent residents of the State.

In its judgment, the bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J Sreenivas Rao focused on Rule 3(a) of the 2017 Rules, as amended by G.O.Ms.No.33 on July 19, 2024. The primary purpose of this rule is to reserve seats for local candidates in medical colleges. The court recognized that if this rule were to be completely struck down, it would allow students from across the country to seek admission in Telangana's medical colleges, potentially disadvantaging the state's permanent residents.

The Court also noted that a more stringent condition has been added that the candidate has to pass the qualifying exam in the State of Telangana.

The bench "read down" Rule 3(a) and 3(iii) of the 2017 Rules to interpret that the rules should not apply to the permanent residents of Telangana. The High Court construed the same in line with Article 371D(2)(b)(ii) of the Indian Constitution, which allows for special provisions to be made for people from different parts of the state regarding admission to educational institutions.

"Therefore, we read down the Rule 3(a) and 3(iii) of the Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission (Admission into MBBS & BDS Courses) Rules, 2017, as amended vide G.O.Ms.No.33, dated 19.07.2024. It is held that the aforesaid Rule shall not apply to permanent residents of the State of Telangana. Thus, by reading down the Rule in the manner indicated above shall also be in consonance of object of Article 371D(2)(b)(ii) of the Constitution of India i.e., of making special provision to the people of different parts of State for admission to educational institutions."

The High Court also suggested the State Government to frame the guidelines/rules to determine as to when a student can be considered as a permanent resident of the State of Telangana

"We direct that Rule 3(a) of the 2017 Rules, as amended vide G.O.Ms.No.33, dated 19.07.2024, will be interpreted to mean that the petitioners shall be eligible to admission in the medical colleges in the State of Telangana, if their domicile is of State of Telangana or if they are permanent residents of the State of Telangana. It is stated at the bar that there are no guidelines/rules framed by the State Government to ascertain whether a student is a domicile/permanent resident of the State of Telangana. We, therefore, grant the liberty to the Government to frame the guidelines/rules to determine as to when a student can be considered as a permanent resident of the State of Telangana."

Notably, in August 2023, the High Court's Division Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice T. Vinod Kumar read down Rule 3(III)(B) of 2017 Rules.

Rule 3(III)(B) of the 2017 Rules stipulated that a person shall be deemed to be a local candidate, if he/she has either studied four consecutive years preceding the exam in the State or, has lived for 7 consecutive years in the State preceding the exam.

The bench refrained from striking down the Rule honouring the object of the legislation, which is to provide reservations for local candidates. The Court rather read it down, holding that the same will not be applicable to permanent residents of the State.

Case Details : THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND ORS. Versus KALLURI NAGA NARASIMHA ABHIRAM AND ORS. SLP(C) No. 21536-21588/2024