Petition challenges ‘unfair’ rules of medical admissions

Mumbai: A medical student has approached the Bombay High Court challenging a rule that bars candidates who secured seats in the first three Centralised Admission Process (CAP) rounds from participating in the stray vacancy round (Round 4)—even if they never took admission. The petition argues that the restriction blocks meritorious students from upgrading to better colleges, while lower-scoring candidates who failed to secure seats earlier are now eligible for newly opened vacancies in top institutions.

The student filed the plea in early November, seeking an additional CAP round or a re-allotment of Round 3. During the second hearing, justices Ravindra Ghuge and Ashwin Bhobe highlighted the seriousness of the issue and allowed the petitioner to amend and widen the scope of the plea, paving the way for a direct challenge to the rule and subsequent Common Entrance Test (CET) Cell notifications.

The bench observed that many students earlier admitted to Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery (BAMS), Bachelor of Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery (BHMS) and Bachelor of Unani Medicine and Surgery (BUMS) programmes in reputed colleges surrendered their seats after securing MBBS admissions, creating fresh vacancies in prominent institutions. Students with higher scores but lower-ranked Round 3 allocations are now seeking a fair chance to compete for these newly available seats. However, a clause in the admission brochure bars all Round 3 candidates from entering the stray vacancy round, the petition stated.

Advocate Rahul Kamerkar, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the restriction violates basic principles of fairness and transparency. “We are challenging the rule that disallows students from applying in the stray vacancy round after securing seats up to Round 3,” he said, adding that the system allows lower-ranked students to gain access to premium colleges simply because higher-scoring candidates are blocked.

Calling the situation an “unfair scenario,” the court noted that students with fewer marks are now moving into government and top private colleges only due to the existing restriction. The judges said the matter required deeper legal scrutiny and permitted the petitioner to add more grounds and seek further reliefs in the amended petition.

Meanwhile, the State CET Cell defended its stand, stating that Group B admissions (BAMS, BHMS, BUMS) were conducted according to the schedule fixed by the AYUSH Admissions Central Counselling Committee. It clarified that MBBS/BDS (Group A) and AYUSH (Group B) admissions are regulated by two separate national bodies—the Medical Counselling Committee and the AYUSH committee—each with independently determined timelines. The delay in MBBS counselling this year, the CET Cell said, caused Group B admissions to be held earlier, resulting in overlaps and confusion.