Absolute Domicile-Based Reservation In Medical & Allied Courses Unconstitutional; Vacant Seats Must Be Open To Outsiders: J&K&L High Court

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that while the Union Territory may reserve a portion of seats in medical and allied professional colleges to benefit local candidates, such reservation cannot be absolute.

The Court held that if seats remain vacant after counselling of local applicants, the restriction on domicile must be relaxed, enabling candidates from outside the UT to compete.

The High Court was hearing three clubbed writ petitions filed by Jammu College of Physiotherapy and Jammu Institute of Ayurveda and Research, challenging the policy of making NEET mandatory for Bachelor of Physiotherapy admissions and restricting counselling only to domiciles of Jammu and Kashmir, which had resulted in a substantial number of seats remaining vacant.

A Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Dhar, while adjudicating the matter, referred to the constitutional principles governing fair admission processes and observed that “once the State or UT has incurred expenditure in creating these institutions, it is open to a State or UT to reserve a portion of seats for admission to medical institutions to local candidates so as to ensure that the State benefits from the medical professionals who are trained in these institutions but such reservation cannot be wholesale as the same would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution”.

The petitioner institutions had challenged the policy under which all seats in Bachelor of Physiotherapy (BPT) and AYUSH courses (undergraduate and postgraduate) are filled exclusively through J&K BOPEE on the basis of NEET Score and only from domicile candidates.

It was contended that NEET was not a statutory prerequisite for admission to the Bachelor of Physiotherapy course and that S.O. 175 of 20.05.2020 effectively created a system of total reservation for domiciles of Jammu and Kashmir, leaving no scope for candidates from outside the Union Territory.

As a result, the petitioners contended, a substantial number of seats remained vacant due to an inadequate pool of local applicants. The petitioners further pointed out that, before the impugned policy, private institutions filled management quota seats through all-India counselling, but that avenue had been closed off, causing a continuing loss of seats and resources.

The Court, upon hearing the matter, held that the Government has the authority to regulate admissions and ensure merit-based selection. It found no illegality in using NEET scores even for BPT admissions, noting that a uniform national test promotes transparency and academic standards.

However, on the question of restricting admissions only to the domiciles of J&K, the Court held the policy unconstitutional to the extent it results in wholesale reservation.

Relying extensively on Dr Pradeep Jain v. Union of India, the Court recalled that the Supreme Court condemned the complete exclusion of outside candidates and held that at least 30% seats must be open on an all-India basis. The judgment was quoted to demonstrate that an absolute domicile-based reservation violates Article 14.

Applying this principle, the Court stated that “creating a situation whereby the management of a college is forced to keep certain number of seats vacant on account of non-availability of candidates in the face of restrictions imposed by the Government is violative of fundamental right of the management to run educational institution.”

The Court also referred to Index Medical College v. State of Madhya Pradesh, where the Supreme Court held that unfilled seats are “detrimental to public interest” and keeping them vacant amounts to “national waste of resources”.

Consequently, the Court reasoned that when seats continue to remain vacant despite exhausting counselling of local candidates, preventing private colleges from filling them with eligible candidates from outside the Union Territory results in financial loss to the institutions, leads to waste of national resources, and operates as an unreasonable restriction on the right to carry on occupation under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

Accordingly, the writ petitions were disposed of with directions that admissions to BPT courses will continue to be made based on NEET scores, but if adequate candidates are not available, BOPEE shall fill the remaining seats by lowering the merit.

Where seats still remain vacant after counselling of J&K domiciles, S.O. 175 dated 20.05.2020 stands relaxed, and BOPEE will conduct counselling from candidates belonging to other parts of the country. The provisional admissions already made pursuant to interim orders are also treated as regularised.

Case Title: Jammu College of Physiotherapy & Ors Vs Union Territory of J&K & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw JKL

Click here to read/download Judgment