The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a plea that sought the cancellation and re-conduct of the third round of the all India quota (AIQ) counselling for NEET-PG 2024. The bench, consisting of Justices B R Gavai and K Vinod Chandran, heard arguments from the counsel representing the National Medical Commission (NMC) who stated that altering the counselling process at this stage would disrupt the admission schedules across all states and have a cascading effect.
The plea was initially brought forth by three petitioners who argued that the third AIQ counselling round commenced before the conclusion of the second round of state counselling in several states. This overlap, according to the petitioners, allowed certain candidates to block seats in the AIQ round which they could later relinquish if they received a better option in their respective state rounds, creating an unfair advantage and depriving other deserving candidates of these opportunities.
Advocate Tanvi Dubey, representing the petitioners, highlighted the inconsistency and claimed that it led to a prejudiced situation where seats were blocked by candidates, particularly noting the delayed conclusion of round 2 state counselling in Madhya Pradesh. The petitioners contended that this resulted in meritorious candidates losing out on seats they otherwise might have secured.
On February 4, the apex court had asked for responses from the Centre, the NMC, and other involved parties regarding the plea. However, upon reviewing the arguments and the implications of a mid-process change, the court decided against the petition. The justices noted that entertaining this plea could potentially lead to numerous similar requests, complicating the counselling process further.
The bench underscored that the primary concern was the potential disruption of the academic schedule for postgraduate medical education across the country. They emphasized the need to maintain the established timeline to prevent any further complications in an already intricate process.
The plea also suggested that if not a complete redo of the third round, at least a fourth round of counselling should be conducted for seats that remained blocked after the premature conclusion of the second round in some states. Additionally, it asked for provisions for eligible candidates to register for a stray round of counselling.
