Follow us
After a petition regarding the 100% institutional preference for admissions to PG medical courses had been filed, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a notice to BFUHS ordering them to provide an explanation for their divulsion from the law while offering admissions.
On Tuesday, 16th June 2020, the Punjab & Haryana High Court issued the Punjab Government notice on their decision to offer 100% institutional preference in the state-quota seats under postgraduate medical admissions, under the current admission season.
As per the notice from the HC, the court has demanded an affidavit explaining the motive behind the percentage of reserved seats under the institutional preference which also excludes other categories.
Further, the registrar of Baba Farid University of Health Sciences (BFUHS) has been asked to submit the list of candidates who have availed the reservation of Institutional Preference under the first counselling round. Along with the list, BFUHS has been asked to submit a report mentioning the percentage of seats under State Quota that have been filled under Institutional Preference.
The order had been issued by a bench comprising of Justice Jaswant Sawan Singh and Justice Sant Prakash after hearing a petition which had been filed by Dr Shubham Mittal. According to the petition, 100% of the state quota seats had been granted the benefit of Institutional Preference for applicants under General and Persons with Disabilities.
The petition further added that despite the directions that had been issued, BFUHS released a notification for offering 100% institutional preference during the counselling session for MD, MS and PG Diploma courses for the current academic year. This will lead to unfair admission process denying the right to admission to deserving and meritorious students.
Also Read:Check out if NTA will Delay Conducting the NEET 2020
Adding to this, the counsel of the petitioner shed light on the previously set limit of 50% seats be offered as Institutional Preference under state quota seats. The additional reservation of seats under the category goes against the decision that had been finalised in the case of “Saurabh Chaudhari and other vs Union of India vs others”, by the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court.
Also Read:NEET Test Centres to be Doubled by NTA
It was also noted that since the institutional preference is applicable horizontally under the various reservation categories, restricting the reservation to the general and PwD categories while excluding others, was also questionable. As per the sources, further hearing on the matter will be held on 26th June 2020.
