Madras High Court
Dr.Agasthiya.A vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 27 October, 2025
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
W.P.No.23726 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 06.10.2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 27.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.No.23726 of 2023
and W.M.P.Nos.23236, 23237 & 23238 of 2023
Dr.Agasthiya.A,
Working as Assistant Surgeon
(General) in Arasamangalam,
Primary Health Center (PHC), Villupuram,
No.6, TN Palayam Road,
Seliamedu, Bahour Commune,
Puducherry – 607 402. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by the Secretary to Health
& Family Welfare,
Chief Secretariat,
Namakkal Kavingar Maaligai,
4th Floor, Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director of Public Health
and Preventive Medicine,
Chennai – 600 006.
No.359, Annasalai, DMS Complex,
Teynampet, Chennai – 600 006.
Page 1 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
W.P.No.23726 of 2023
3. The Selection Committee,
The Director of Medical Education,
No.156, Poonamallee High Road,
New Bupathy Nagar,
Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031.
4. The National Medical Commission,
Rep. by its Director,
Pocket-14, Sector-8,
Dwarka Phase – 1,
New Delhi – 110 077.
5. Dr.S.Kannan
Application No.23PG104674
6. Dr.Shenbaga Devi
Application No.23PG108348
Since address of the 5th and 6th respondents
is not known the 3rd respondent may represent
them also as representing capacity as per 16 of
the Madras High Court Writ Rules ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
relating to impugned i) clause 5(b) & (c) of Prospectus issued by the 3rd
respondent whereby fixing residence/domicile and place of study of
MBBS including Internship Training as Eligibility Criteria for getting
admission to post Graduate Decree/Diploma Courses for 2023-24 session
and subsequent ii) clarification Note vide Notification
Ref.No.154/SCSII(1)/2023-1 dated 07.07.2023issued by the 3rd
respondent and iii)consequential Provisional Rank List published for
inservice candidates alone and quash the same as highly illegal, unlawful,
arbitrary, discriminative, unreasonable and unconstitutional and violative
of Article 14, 15 & 19 of Constitution of India and consequently direct
Page 2 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
W.P.No.23726 of 2023
the respondent to allot post Graduate Seat to the petitioner in any one of
the Government Medical Colleges or Government seat in any one of self
financing Medical Colleges for the session 2023-2024 under OC category
bases on the marks secured by the petitioner in NEET-PG 2023 by
awarding incentive marks as per G.O.(Ms)No.86 dated 06.03.2019 issued
by Health and Family Welfare (MCA-1) Department.
For Petitioner : Mr.Prakash Adiapadam
For Respondents
For R1 & R2 : Mr.K.Tippu Sulthan
Government Advocate
For R3 : Mrs.M.Sneha
Standing Counsel
For R4 : Ms.Shubharanjani Ananth
ORDER
This petition has been filed challenging the prospectus
issued by the third respondent insofar as its clause 5(b) & (c), thereby
fixing residence/domicile and place of study of MBBS including
internship training as eligibility criteria for getting admission to post
graduate degree/diploma course for the academic year 2023-2024
sessions and the clarification note dated 07.07.2023 issued by the third
respondent and consequential provisional rank list dated 27.07.2023
published by the third respondent insofar as the rank list published for in-
service candidates alone.
2. The petitioner is a resident of Puducherry and she had
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
completed her medical degree in the year 2016 in Indira Gandhi Medical
College and Research Institute, Puducherry. Thereafter she was appointed
as Assistant Surgeon (General) in Arasamangalam Primary Health
Centre,Villupuram, by way of direct recruitment under unresearved
category based on her merit. After completion of five years and four
months service, she had appeared for the National Eligibility cum
Entrance Examination-Post Graduate (hereinafter referred to as “NEET-
PG), 2023 conducted by National Board of Examinations in Medical
Science for the academic year 2023-2024 and secured 404 marks out of
800 marks. She had applied for admission to PG degree under Open
Category in Tamil Nadu Government Medical Colleges and Government
seats in Self Financing Medical Colleges 2023-2024 sessions conducted
by the third respondent.
3. On 22.07.2023, the third respondent had published
provisional rank list for the PG degree/diploma courses and the
petitioner's name was not found in the rank list. As per G.O.(Ms)No.86
dated 06.03.2019, the petitioner is entitled for 5% of service incentive
marks. Therefore, totally she secured 505 marks. But the selection list
contained the names of the candidates who had scored lesser than the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
petitioner. On enquiry, the petitioner was informed that as per Clause 5
(b) & (c) of the prospectus of the year 2023-2024, only the candidates,
who are natives of Tamil Nadu and who have undergone MBBS/BDS
Course including internship period either in the State of Tamil Nadu or
outside Tamil Nadu are eligible to apply for government quota PG seats
along with nativity certificate in government and self financing
institutions. Since, the petitioner had studied MBBS course in Indira
Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Puducherry, the
candidature of the petitioner was not considered for the PG degree. The
petitioner also pointed out that some of the candidates who completed
their medical under graduate degree in Puducherry have gotten selected
under the Tamil Nadu service quota. In fact, in all previous years, there
was not such clause in the prospectus and only in the academic year
2023-2024, such clause has been inserted by fixing residence and place of
study as criteria. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition with
the above prayer.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that it is in clear violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is
also contrary to the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in several cases. He further submitted that in order to apply in the
Open Category, it is not necessary that the candidate should be a resident
of Tamil Nadu and even a non-resident of Tamil Nadu can compete under
the Open Category. The nativity should be looked into only when the
candidate claims reservation under a particular category.
4.1 In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in the case of Dr.Tanvi Behl Vs. Shrey goel & ors., in Civil Appeal
No.9289 of 2019 dated 29.01.2025, which held as follows:-
“31. We are all domiciled in the territory of India.
We are all residents of India. Our common bond as citizens
and residents of one country gives us the right not only to
choose our residence anywhere in India, but also gives us
the right to carry on trade & business or a profession
anywhere in India. It also gives us the right to seek
admission in educational institutions across India. The
benefit of 'reservation' in educational institutions including
medical colleges to those who reside in a particular State
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
can be given to a certain degree only in MBBS courses, for
which we have assigned reasons in the preceding
paragraphs. But considering the importance of specialists
doctors' in PG Medical Course, reservation at the higher
level on the basis of 'residence' would be violative of Article
14 of the Constitution of India. This has been explained
with pronounced clarity both in Jagadish Saran and
Pradeep Jain. If such a reservation is permitted then it
would be an invasion on the fundamental rights of several
students, who are being treated unequally simply for the
reasons that they belong to a different State in the Union!
This would be a violation of the equality Clause in Article
14 of the Constitution and would amount to a denial of
equality before the law.
32. The law laid down in Jagadish Saran and
Pradeep Jain has been followed by this Court in a number
of decisions including the Constitution Bench decision in
Saurabh Chaudri. We may also refer here judgments such
as Magan Mehrotra and Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) and
Ors. (2003) 11 SCC 186, Nikhil Himthani v. State of
Uttarakhand and Ors. (2013) 10 SCC 237, Vishal Goyal
and Ors. v. State of Karnataka and Ors. (2014) 11 SCC 456
and Neil Aurelio Nunes (OBC Reservation) and Ors. v.
Union of India and Ors. (2022) 4 SCC 1, which have all
followed Pradeep Jain. Thus, residence-based reservations
are not permissible in PG medical courses.
33. Having made the above determination that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
residence-based reservation is impermissible in PG
Medical courses, the State quota seats, apart from a
reasonable number of institution-based reservations, have
to be filled strictly on the basis of merit in the All- India
examination. Thus, out of 64 seats which were to be filled
by the State in its quota 32 could have been filled on the
basis of institutional preference, and these are valid. But
the other 32 seats earmarked as U.T. Chandigarh pool
were wrongly filled on the basis of residence, and we
uphold the findings of the High Court on this crucial
aspect.”
Thus it is clear that resident based reservation are not permissible in post
graduate medical course.
4.2. He also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India reported in (2013) 10 SCC 237 in the case of Nikhil
Himthani Vs. State of Uttarakhand & ors., which held as follows :-
“11. The Constitution Bench of this Court has held
in Saurabh Chaudri and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
(supra) that giving institutional preference is a matter of
State Policy which can be invalidated only in the event of it
being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Hence, the
question that we have to decide in this writ petition is
whether clauses 1, 2 and 3 of the Eligibility Criteria in the
information bulletin are ultra vires Article 14 of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
Constitution of India.
12. Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees to
every person equality before law and equal protection of
laws. In Dr. Jagadish Saran and Ors. v. Union of India
(1980) 2 SCC 768, Krishna Iyer J, writing the judgment on
behalf of the three Judges referring to Article 14 of the
Constitution held that equality of opportunity for every
person in the country is the constitutional guarantee and
therefore merit must be the test for selecting candidates,
particularly in the higher levels of education like post-
graduate medical courses, such as MD. In the language of
Krishna Iyer, J.:
Flowing from the same stream of equalism is another
limitation. The basic medical needs of a region or the
preferential push justified for a handicapped group cannot
prevail in the same measure all the highest scales of
speciality where the best skill or talent, must be handpicked
by selecting according to capability. At the level of Ph.d.
M.D., or levels of higher proficiency, where international
measure of talent is made, where losing one great scientist
or technologist in-the-making is a national loss, the
considerations we have expanded upon as important lose
their potency. Here equality, measured by matching
excellence, has more meaning and cannot be diluted much
without grave risk....
13. Relying on the aforesaid reasons in Dr. Jagadish
Saran and Ors. v. Union of India (supra) a three Judge
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
Bench of this Court in Dr. Pradeep Jain's case (supra) held
that excellence cannot be compromised by any other
consideration for the purpose of admission to post-graduate
medical courses such as MD/MS and the like because that
would be detrimental to the interests of the nation and
therefore reservation based on residential requirement in
the State will affect the right to equality of opportunity
under Article 14 of the Constitution but:
22....a certain percentage of seats may in the present
circumstances be reserved on the basis of institutional
preference in the sense that a student who has passed
MBBS course from a medical college or university, may be
given preference for admission to the post-graduate course
in the same medical college or university.
This view expressed in Dr. Pradeep Jain's case has
been reiterated by another three Judge Bench of this Court
in Magan Mehrotra and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
(supra) after a reconsideration and independent
examination.”
Hence, he prayed to allow this writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
5. The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent
submitted that the petitioner, having been participated in the selection
process and after the complete knowledge of the prospectus, cannot
question the selection process and she is estopped as per the Rule of
estoppel. Admittedly, the petitioner is a resident of Puducherry and she
completed her under graduate degree in the Union Territory of
Puducherry. Though she was appointed as Assistant Civil Surgeon in the
Primary Health Centre, Villupuram, it doesn't give her any right for
selection under the service quota. The prospectus is very clear in respect
of eligibility criteria that the candidate should be a resident of India and
should have undergone MBBS course including the entire Compulsory
Rotatory Medical Internship in the Sate of Tamil Nadu. Therefore, she is
not eligible for selection of post graduate degree under the service quota.
In support of his contention he relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Full Bench of this Court reported in 1999(III) CTC 675 in the case of
Dr.R.Muralil Vs. Dr.R.Kamalakkannan and three others, as follows :-
“6. We hold that writ petitioners having participated
in the written test after fully knowing the terms and
conditions of the prospectus are estopped from questioning
the selection process. Respondents have not deviated from
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
the same.”
Hence, he prayed for dismissal of this writ petition.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and
perused the material placed before this Court.
7. On perusal of the records, it is revealed that the impugned
Clause 5(b)&(c) in the prospectus issued by the third respondent were not
found in the earlier notification. The candidates who are non resident of
Tamil Nadu were also given post graduate seats in the government seats
in self financing institutions. It is relevant to extract the impugned Clause
of prospectus issued by the third respondent for the year 2023-2024, as
follows:-
“b) Candidates should be Citizens of India and should
have undergone MBBS course including the entire
Compulsory Rotatory Medical Internship(CRMI) period in
the State of Tamil Nadu.
(c) The candidates who are claiming Nativity of Tamil
Nadu should upload their Certificates of Nativity of Tamil
Nadu issued by the competent authority of the revenue
department of Tamil Nadu Government with official seal.
Candidates are advised against dual nativity and if found
anytime during admission or course of study, their allotment
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
will be cancelled and appropriate legal action would be
initlated by competent authorities. Candidates who are
claiming community reservation of Tamil Nadu should
upload both of their
i. Community certificate issued by competent authority
of Revenue department of Tamil Nadu Government with
official seal. And
ii. Community certificate of either of Parents issued by
competent authority of Revenue department of Tamil Nadu
Government with official seal.”
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Dr.Pradeep Jain & ors Vs. Union of India & ors., reported in (1984) 3
SCC 657, held that wholesale reservation made by some of the State
Governments on the basis of domicile or residence requirement within
the State or on the basis of institutional preference for students who have
passed the qualifying examination held by the university or the State
excluding all students not satisfying this requirement, regardless of merit,
is to be unconstitutional and void as being in violation of Article 14 of the
Constitution. It was further held that equality of opportunity cannot be
made dependent upon where a citizen resides. The primary consideration
in selection of candidates for admission to the medical colleges must be
merit. The object of any valid scheme of admissions must be to select the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
best candidates for being admitted to medical colleges and if any
departure is to be made from the principle of selection on the basis of
merit, it must be justified on the touchstone of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India.
9. Further, in the case of Nikhil Himthani Vs. State of
Uttarakhand & ors., reported in (2013) 10 SCC 237 the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India held that no preference can be given to the
candidates on the basis of domicile to compete for the institutional quota
of the State if such candidates have done their MBBS course in colleges
outside the State. Therefore, the Clause 5(b) & (c) in the prospectus
issued by the third respondent dated 07.07.2023 are violative of Article
14 of the Constitution of India.
10. Further the petitioner is not estopped to challenge the clause
5(b) & (c) of the prospectus issued by the third respondent, after having
been participated in the selection process for the simple reason that only
during the selection process, the selected candidates list was published
and the candidature of the petitioner was not considered by the third
respondent on the ground that the petitioner did not complete her under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
graduate course of MBBS within the State of Tamil Nadu. It is pertinent
to note that though the petitioner had completed her under graduate
degree in the Union Territory of Puducherry, she was selected and
appointed as Assistant Civil Surgeon in the State of Tamil Nadu. She had
written the NEET-PG examination 2023 and applied for the post graduate
degree under the service quota. This version of eligibility criteria is newly
introduced in the prospectus of the year 2023-2024 and it was not present
in the previous years' prospectus. In fact, in the previous years, the
persons who completed their under graduate degree at Puducherry have
been selected for post graduate degree under the service quota in the State
of Tamil Nadu.
11. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Dr.Tanvi Behl Vs. Shrey goel & ors., in Civil Appeal No.9289 of 2019
dated 29.01.2025, the benefit of reservation in educational institutions
including medical colleges, to those who reside in a particular State shall
be given only to a certain extent. But considering the importance of the
specialist doctors in post graduate medical course, reservation at the
higher level on the basis of residence would be violative of Article 14 of
the Constitution of India. Therefore, the residence based reservations is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
impermissible in post graduate medical courses and the State quota seats,
apart from a reasonable number of institution-based reservations, have to
be filled strictly on the basis of merit through the all India examination.
Therefore, the impugned Clause 5(b)&(c) of the prospectus issued by the
third respondent is illegal, arbitrary and it violates Article 14, 15 & 19 of
the Constitution of India. In order to compete under open category, it is
not necessary that the candidate should be a resident of the particular
State and even nonresident of a particular State can competent under open
category and the resident/domicile is must only if the candidate claims
reservation under a particular category. Therefore, the impugned Clause
5(b) & (c) of the prospectus cannot be sustained and is liable to be
declared as unconstitutional.
12. When the third respondent has all along permitted the
students those who have studied MBBS course and undergone internship
training in Puducherry and subsequently got an appointment in the State
of Tamil Nadu under various category, to apply for post graduate
admission under open category and allotting post graduate seats in
government and self financing institution and a sudden insertion of such
Clause viz., 5(b) & (c) in the prospectus is highly unreasonable.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
13. In view of the above discussions, the Clause 5(b) & (c) of
the Prospectus for getting admission to post Graduate Decree/Diploma
Courses for 2023-2024 session and the clarification notification dated
07.07.2023 issued by the third respondent are hereby quashed. Since the
entire admission process for the post graduate degree were already over,
this Court is not inclined to quash the provisional rank list dated
27.07.2023. It is made clear that the case of the petitioner may be
considered for current academic session 2025-2026.
14. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall
be no order as to costs.
27.10.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral citation : Yes/No
Speaking/non-speaking order
rts
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,
rts
To
1. The Secretary to Health
& Family Welfare,
Government of Tamil Nadu
Chief Secretariat,
Namakkal Kavingar Maaligai,
4th Floor, Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director of Public Health
and Preventive Medicine,
Chennai – 600 006.
No.359, Annasalai, DMS Complex,
Teynampet, Chennai – 600 006.
3. The Selection Committee,
The Director of Medical Education,
No.156, Poonamallee High Road,
New Bupathy Nagar,
Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031.
4. The Director,
National Medical Commission,
Pocket-14, Sector-8,
Dwarka Phase – 1,
New Delhi – 110 077.
W.P.No.23726 of 2023 and
W.M.P.Nos.23236, 23237 & 23238 of 2023
27.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/10/2025 05:38:14 pm )
