Domicile-Based PG Medical Admissions Unconstitutional

 

1. Recently, The Supreme Court of India in the case Tanvi Behl v. Shrey Goel and others, 2025 declared domicile-based reservation for Post-Graduate (PG) medical admissions unconstitutional.
2. This ruling was made after appeals against a ruling by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had already scrapped such reservations.
    

What is Domicile-Based Reservation?
 

1. Domicile quota refers to the practice where states reserve a portion of PG medical seats for candidates who are residents of that state.
2. PG medical admissions: The Centre conducts counseling for 50% of the total intake, while the remaining 50% is filled by state counseling bodies. States allocate a quota for domicile candidates within this 50%.
    

SC's Ruling on Domicile-Based PG Admission Reservation
 

1. Domicile-based reservations create inequality among students based on their state of residence, violating the Right to Equality (Article 14) of the Indian Constitution.
2. Citizens have the right to reside and practice their profession anywhere in India. Thus, restricting PG admissions based on domicile impedes professional mobility.
3. PG medical admissions must be based on merit (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test - NEET) rather than domicile, ensuring a uniform selection process.
4. The SC ruling does not affect admissions already granted based on domicile-based reservations.
5. Domicile vs. Residence:
   1. Domicile refers to a person's legal permanent residence, not just where someone currently lives.
   2. India has a single domicile system—‘Domicile of India’—and state-specific domiciles are not legally valid.
6. Historical Precedent:
   1. The ruling contrasted the 1984 Dr. Pradeep Jain vs Union of India case, where residence-based reservations were allowed for MBBS admissions due to state investments in infrastructure.
   2. However, this logic does not apply to PG medical courses.
       

Constitutional Provisions Involved:
 

1. Article 14: Right to Equality.
2. Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
3. Article 16: Equal opportunity in matters of public employment.
4. Article 19: Protects the freedom to reside and settle in any part of India.
5. Article 5: Defines the Domicile of India.
    

Pros and Cons of Domicile-Based Reservation in Education
 

Pros:
 

1. Ensures local students have adequate representation and opportunities in educational institutions, particularly public sector ones.
2. Acts as a form of affirmative action for disadvantaged communities, improving social and economic status.
3. Provides better access to higher education for local communities, improving economic mobility.
4. Reservation laws contribute to creating an educated workforce that can support regional economic development.
    

Cons:

 

1. Domicile-based reservations may infringe upon the right to move freely and seek education anywhere, as guaranteed by Article 19.
2. Domicile quotas divide the nation and hinder the development of a unified educational and professional space where all citizens have equal opportunities.
3. Restricting access to top talent can hinder innovation, and may discourage investment in local industries and businesses.
4. These policies may overlook deeper issues such as inadequate infrastructure, lack of guidance for exams like NEET, and a mismatch between academic curricula and industry needs.

 

Also Read
UPSC Foundation Course	UPSC Daily Current Affairs
UPSC Monthly Magazine	CSAT Foundation Course
Free MCQs for UPSC Prelims	UPSC Test Series
ENSURE IAS NOTES	Our Booklist