Today, On 7th February, The Supreme Court rejected a plea to cancel and reconduct NEET-PG 2024 counselling round 3, citing disruptions to ongoing processes. Petitioners argued the schedule clashed with state quotas, letting ineligible candidates block seats. However, the court ruled against interference, emphasizing continuity. The decision upholds the existing counselling framework across states.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court dismissed a plea aimed at cancelling the third round of All India Quota (AIQ) counseling for NEET-PG 2024 and conducting it anew.
A bench consisting of Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran made this decision after the counsel for the National Medical Commission (NMC) argued that such a direction would have widespread repercussions across all states.
The counsel stated,
“In case anything has to be done now, it will have a cascading effect in all the states because students have already taken part in the counseling.”
While dismissing the petition, the bench remarked that if they entertained the plea from the three petitioners, “we will have another 30 here.” On February 4, the apex court requested responses from the Centre, the NMC, and others regarding the plea.
The petitioners, eligible for NEET-PG 2024 counseling, contended that the third round of AIQ counseling commenced before the conclusion of the second round of state counseling in some states.
The plea, filed by advocate Tanvi Dubey, expressed grievances over the overlap in the counseling schedules for AIQ and state quotas. It highlighted that several candidates from state quotas, who were otherwise ineligible for AIQ round 3, managed to register and secure seats in AIQ round 3.
The petition argued that when state round 2 counseling opened, candidates had the option to choose between the best available options, potentially leaving AIQ seats if they found better placements in state counseling.
This situation, as the plea stated,
“Created a grave prejudice to the petitioners and similarly placed candidates since they were deprived of the seats which were blocked by the candidates from the states whose round 2 did not commence earlier.”
The petition further claimed that if AIQ round 3 had been conducted after the conclusion of state round 2 counseling for all states, many candidates would not have had the undue advantage of blocking seats in AIQ round 3 and later opting out while participating in state round 2.
It specifically noted that the counseling process led to a scenario where many deserving candidates lost out on seats due to the blocking by candidates from Madhya Pradesh, where round 2 of state counseling had not yet concluded.
The plea alleged that the actions of the respondents contradicted the NEET-PG counseling schedule established by the Supreme Court. It requested the medical counseling committee to either cancel the third round of AIQ counseling for NEET-PG 2024 and conduct it afresh, or alternatively, to hold a fourth round of counseling for the leftover seats blocked by candidates from states where round 2 of state counseling was not finished, while also providing an option for eligible candidates to register for a stray round of NEET-PG 2024 counseling.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
