At present, 50 per cent of the seats in post-graduate medical courses are reserved for the candidates from the state where the medical course is conducted and the other 50 per cent is filled by candidates selected based on an all-India merit list
India has all the diversities a country can imagine and the founders of this nation were eminently mindful of this reality. Instead of ignoring or forcibly filling those possible fault lines, they created ways and means within the democratic framework for an organic process to develop and forge a fraternity that shall help Indians negotiate the differences and work for greater common good.
The Supreme Court’s decision that domicile reservation in post graduate medical seats in states is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution is an attempt to artificially address the question of inequality that exists in India. Article 14 mandates that the state shall not deny any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.
At present, 50 per cent of the seats in post-graduate medical courses are reserved for the candidates from the state where the medical course is conducted and the other 50 per cent is filled by candidates selected based on an all-India merit list. The court would interpret the Article to conclude that reservation in higher levels on the basis of residence would be violative of it and order that all the seats should be filled only on the basis of merit as established by the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) on an all-India basis and there shall be no state quota.
Education is a subject that originally found its place in the state list of the Constitution on the argument that each state should have the right and authority to decide its priorities based on its demands. Some states have forged ahead in healthcare thanks to the vision on which they have acted for the future and the investment they have made to ensure that they have trained manpower to take care of their people. The balancing has to be done to determine which takes precedence, a state’s right to health or an individual’s right to higher education. It’s a complex issue and needs wider application of mind. The court’s order has the potential to upset the balance that exists among Indian states, and hence it must review its decision.
