Dr. Rakesh Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3072 MP

             HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
                   BENCH AT GWALIOR
                           W.P.No.3417/2022
             ( Dr.Rakesh Rajput Vs. State of M.P. and others )
                                    (1)

Gwalior, dated : 04.03.2022

      Shri Prashant Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri M.P.S.Raghuvanshi, learned Additional Advocate General

for the respondents/State.

The petitioner belonging to OBC category and appeared for

NEET PG 2021 examination as in-service candidate category is

before this court seeking following relief :-

"iii - That Respondent department may kindly be directed to allot the seat to the petitioner under General or Open Category."

2. On notice, respondent/State has filed the counter affidavit.

3. With the consent of parties, Writ Petition is heard finally and

disposed of.

4. The facts as surfaced during the course of arguments are in

narrow compass.

The National Board of Examinations in Medical Science, New

Delhi has prescribed the cut-off scores for NEET PG 2021 as

follows: -

1. General/EWS (50th Percentile) 302 marks

2. OBC/SC/ST (40th Percentile) 263 marks

3. GENERAL-PWD (45th Percentile) 285 marks

5. Sub Rule (4) of Rule 14 of Medical Education Entrance Rules

2018, as amended vide notification dt.5th October 2021 (Annexeure

attached to the return) provides that it shall be compulsory for each

applicant to clear the NEET PG 2021 examination.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR W.P.No.3417/2022 ( Dr.Rakesh Rajput Vs. State of M.P. and others )

6. The petitioner has secured 283 marks (48th percentile) falling

in category of SC/ST/OBC. Learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that even if the petitioner has not secured 302 or more marks

in General Category while qualifying NEET, he is still eligible for

consideration of allotment of seats against unreserved category. If

over all merit position is seen after giving him the benefit of in-

service candidate, he stands higher in merit list, than other General

category candidates. Learned counsel relies upon the judgment of

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saurav Yadav and others Vs.

State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2021) 4 SCC 542

[Para 34].

7. Per contra, Shri M.P.S.Raghuvanshi, learned Additional

Advocate General for the respondents/State submits that indeed the

law is well settled that a candidate belonging to reserved category

can always compete with the candidates of unreserved category if he

fulfills all the requisites of the criteria fixed for General category

candidate. Besides the allotment of seat or post to reserved category

candidate in unreserved category shall not lead to discount of the

existing seats of reserved category. Nevertheless, a reserved category

candidate if does not fulfill the criteria fixed for unreserved category

at the initial stage, he can not make claim of a seat in unreserved

category. Learned counsel further submits that in the present case, to

be considered for PG unreserved category, the candidate must secure

50th percentile i.e. 302 marks, only then he may be considered for his HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR W.P.No.3417/2022 ( Dr.Rakesh Rajput Vs. State of M.P. and others )

position in the merit list with the weightage marks and not otherwise.

8. Upon thoughtful consideration of the contentions advanced by

the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that there is

substantial force in the submission of Shri Raghuvanshi. Since the

petitioner undisputedly has secured 283 marks (less than 50 th

percentile), he has not qualified NEET Entrance Examination as

General candidate, instead as an OBC candidate. As such,

petitioner's relief for consideration against the unreserved category,

as quoted above, on the premise that while adding with the benefit of

weightage of in-service candidate, he shall be more meritorious than

the general category candidate, who has secured more than 302

marks (50th percentile), can not be countenanced for once the

petitioner has not secured minimum 302 marks (50th percentile), he

can not make a claim against the unreserved category seat or General

category seat with the help of weightage marks by relying upon the

judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Saurav Yadav

(supra), as in our opinion, the same has no bearing over the

controversy involved in this Writ Petition. Now turning to inter-se

claim between the petitioner and respondents No.4 & 5 with the help

of the merit list, it is evident that respondent No.4 - Mahendra Singh

Bhadoriya has secured 332 marks as against minimum 302 marks

(50th percentile) in NEET Entrance Examination and respondent

No.5 - Surjeet Kumar Shukla has secured 324 marks, whereas the

petitioner has secured 283 marks. As such, the claim of the petitioner HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR W.P.No.3417/2022 ( Dr.Rakesh Rajput Vs. State of M.P. and others )

as against respondents No.4 and 5 is based on misplaced perception

and dehors the rule position/the requirement under the criteria fixed.

Consequently, the relief No.iii, quoted above, as claimed by the

petitioner, can not be countenanced.

9. Writ Petition is found to be devoid of substance, accordingly,

dismissed.

                   (ROHIT ARYA)                 (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
                     JUDGE                             JUDGE
SP

SANJEEV KUMAR
PHANSE
2022.03.08
10:48:03 +05'30'