Supreme Court on Monday, has asked the Madras High Court to decide on the petitions challenging centre government’s order restraining the grant of 50% reservation to the OBC candidates in medical seats surrendered by the state in All India Quota (AIQ) for UG, PG, and dental courses for the year 2020-2021.
SC bench comprising Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice Hemant Gupta has directed that irrespective of the pendency of any other case, the court must decide on the plea filed by Tamil Nadu government and others.
“All the contention raised in petitions (before it) should be decided by the High Court,” stated the bench.
The bench said that the pendency of the Saloni Kumari case seeking grant of 27 percent OBC quota in terms of a Central act can not act as a hindrance for the Madras High Court to decide on the implementation of 50 percent OBC quota as per the state law and asked to decide the matter on merits.
The state government has earlier moved the top court on July 2 seeking directions to the High Court to decide expeditiously on the various petitions filed against centre’s order for not granting the 50 percent quota to OBCs in medical seats surrendered by state in graduation, post-graduation, and dental courses in 2020-2021.
After the Madras High Court June 22 order keeping in abeyance the state government’s plea in context to the implementation of 50 percent reservation for the OBC candidates in the medical admissions, the Tamil Nadu government has approached apex court.
The plea filed by state government stated, “The allocation of medical seats for the academic year 2020-2021 is already underway, and on June 16, 2020, the results for the second round of the counselling were announced. The candidates are in the process of reporting to the allotted Institute/College.”
The state government contended that if the writ petition was not allowed, hundreds of deserving candidates will be denied seats in the medical admissions. Thereby reinforcing their social and educational disadvantage and further perpetrating mass inequality in the State of Tamil Nadu.
The top court was earlier approached by the Tamil Nadu government in context to the same grievance last month which directed the respondent to approach the Madras High Court.
After taking note of the lack of appreciation by the High Court in connection to the urgency of the matter, the state govt had moved Supreme Court and stated in its petition, “High Court has erroneously acceded to representations made by the respondents and unjustifiably kept in the Petitioner’s writ petition in abeyance till this Court issues orders in an ostensibly identical matter.”
