[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Uttaranchal Unani Medical College vs Union Of India And Others on 23 December, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
2025:UHC:11489-DB
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI AND
HON'BLE JUSTICE SRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY
Writ Petition No. 1068 of 2025 (MB)
Uttaranchal Unani Medical College
and Hospital --Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others --Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Advocates:-
Mr. T.A. Khan, Senior Advocate assisted by Mohd. Shaify, Advocate for
petitioner
Mr. Sachin Mohan Singh Mehta, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand
Mr. Manoj Kumar, Standing Counsel for Union of India
Mr. Nishant Krishna Adhikari, Advocate with Mr. Gaurav Nagpal, Advocate
holding brief of Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, Advocate for respondent No. 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Justice Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari)
1. Petitioner is running a Unani College in the name
and style of "Uttaranchal Unani Medical College &
Hospital, Mustafabad (Padartha), Dhanpura District
Haridwar.
2. According to the petitioner, due to minimum cut
off marks, fixed by National Commission for Indian
System of Medicine for admission in BUMS Course i.e.
50 percentile in National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test,
sufficient number of students are not coming forward
for taking admission during academic year 2025-2026
and as against total intake capacity of 42, so far only 5
students have taken admission.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner refers to
Regulation 4(2) of National Commission for Indian
System of Medicine (Minimum Standards of
2025:UHC:11489-DB
Undergraduate Unani Education), Regulations 2022,
which is extracted below:
"(2) National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test.- (i) There shall be a
uniform entrance examination for all medical institutions at the
under-graduate level, namely, the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance
Test (NEET) for admission to under-graduate programme in each
academic year and shall be conducted by an authority designed by
the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine.
Provided that the NEET shall not be applicable to Pre-Tib
candidates as per the clause (i) of sub-section (1) under
section 14 of National Commission for Indian System of
Medicine Act, 2020 (14 of 2020).
(ii) In order to consider for admission to under-graduate programme
for an academic year, it shall be necessary for a candidate to obtain
minimum of marks at 50 percentile in the National Eligibility-cum-
Entrance Test for under-graduate programme held for the said
academic year:
Provided that in respect of,-
(iii) candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, the
minimum marks shall be at 40th percentile;
(iv) candidates with specified disabilities under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (49 of
2016), the minimum marks shall be 45 percentile in
the case of General category and 40 percentile in the
case of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and
Other Backward Classes:
Provided further that where sufficient number of candidates
in the respective category fail to secure minimum marks in
the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test held for any
academic year for admission to under-graduate programme,
the National Commission for Indian System of Medicine in
consultation with the Central Government may at its
discretion lower the minimum marks required for admission
to under-graduate programme for candidates belonging to
respective category and marks so lowered by the Central
Government shall be applicable for that academic year only.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner submits that
it is incumbent on National Commission for Indian
System of Medicine to request the Central Government
to lower the minimum marks required for admission to
undergraduate programmes when sufficient number of
candidates in their respective category fail to get
admission in BUMS Course. He submits that National
Commission for Indian System of Medicine is failing in
its duty by not requesting Central Government to lower
2025:UHC:11489-DB
the cut off marks specified in Regulation 4(2) of
Regulations 2022.
5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner relies
upon a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Harshit Agarwal & Ors. Vs. Union of
India and Others, reported as 2021 (2) SCC 710.
Para 15 of the said judgment is extracted below:
"15. There are about 7000 seats available for admission to the first
year BDS course during the year 2020-2021. We are not impressed
by the argument of the learned Additional Solicitor General that
there are sufficient number of Dentists in the country and, therefore,
there is no harm in the seats being unfilled. However, we find force
in the submission made by the learned Additional Solicitor General
that the fee charged by the private dental colleges is a deterrent for
the seats not being filled up. Only 265 out of 7000 seats are vacant
in government colleges. All the other unfilled seats are in private
dental colleges. The managements of private Dental Colleges shall
consider reducing the fee charged by them to encourage students
to join the colleges. Reliance was placed by the first respondent on
an order passed by this Court in Union of India v. Federation of
Self-Financed Ayurvedic Colleges [Union of India v. Federation of
Self-Financed Ayurvedic Colleges, (2020) 12 SCC 115] to submit
that non-availability of eligible candidates for admission
to AYUSH (UG) courses cannot be a reason to lower the standards
prescribed by the Central Council for admission. The facts of this
case are entirely different as the Dental Council of India itself
recommended for lowering the minimum marks and the
Regulations provide for lowering the minimum marks. That apart,
the first respondent has exercised its discretion and lowered the
minimum marks for admission to first year BDS course for the year
2019-2020."
6. Learned counsel appearing for National
Commission for Indian System of Medicine, however,
submits that counseling process is over; therefore, no
useful purpose would be served by lowering the cut off
marks. He further submits that 2nd proviso to
Regulation 4(2) confers discretion upon National
Commission for Indian System of Medicine and it does
not create any right which can be enforced by writ of
mandamus.
2025:UHC:11489-DB
7. Since the proviso enables the National
Commission to lower the cut off marks in consultation
with the Central Government, whenever found
necessary, therefore it casts a duty upon National
Commission to request the Central Government
whenever educational institutions, recognized by
National Commission face difficulty in getting sufficient
number of students. The National Commission cannot
remain oblivious to the problems of institution
concerned.
8. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is
disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make
representation to National Commission for Indian
System of Medicine. If petitioner makes representation
within one week from today, National Commission shall
examine the matter and refer the issue to Central
Government for consultation and necessary order. This
Court hopes and expects that the entire exercise shall
be concluded as earliest as possible.
_______________________________
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.
____________________________
SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
Dt: 23rd December, 2025
Mahinder
