20 March 2024 Administrative Law >> Constitution & Law Procedure   |   Constitutional & Government >> Constitution & Law Procedure   |   Education >> Miscellaneous  

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a significant judgment in the case of Manoj Kumar vs. Union of India & Ors., expanding access to medical education for children of service personnel.

Facts:

The appellant, Manoj Kumar, challenged the cancellation of his admission to the MBBS program under the Maharashtra State quota. Kumar, son of a BSF officer posted outside the state, qualified for admission under the OBC/NCL category. However, his admission was revoked due to failing to meet the domicile requirement of passing SSC and HSC exams from a Maharashtra institution.

Grounds for Appeal:

Kumar contended that the domicile clause unfairly discriminated against children of servicemen with limited control over their parent's job postings. He cited the precedent set in Archana Sudhakar Mandulkar vs. Dean, Govt. Medical College, Nagpur, where a similar restriction was struck down.

Court's Reasoning:

The Court acknowledged the hardship faced by children of service personnel and the inherent unfairness of the domicile requirement in their specific situation.

Invoking the principle of "restitutive justice," the Court recognized Kumar's right to a remedy for the wrongful cancellation.

Court's Order:

• The Court quashed the Bombay High Court's order and the college's decision to revoke admission.
• Recognizing the advanced stage of the current academic year, the Court directed the college to create an additional seat for Kumar's admission in the 2024 academic year.
• A compensation of Rs. 1 lakh was awarded to Kumar for the inconvenience caused by the admission cancellation.
• Importantly, the Court mandated the authorities to modify the guidelines to ensure children of Maharashtra domicile, with parents employed in Central Government services (including defense and paramilitary forces), qualify for MBBS seats regardless of their parent's posting location.

This judgment paves the way for more equitable access to medical education for children of service members and serves as a reminder of the Court's commitment to protecting individuals from unreasonable eligibility criteria.