- Home
- /
- Supreme court
- /
- Supreme Court Regularises MBBS...
Supreme Court Regularises MBBS Degree Of Student Whose ST Certificate Was Cancelled After Her Course, Imposes Rs 5 Lakh Cost On Father
Yash Mittal
30 Aug 2025 7:20 PM IST
The Supreme Court recently safeguarded the academic career of a medical student by regularizing her MBBS degree, even though it had been obtained on the basis of a Scheduled Tribe certificate submitted by her father, which was later invalidated by the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The Court also imposed Rs. 5 Lakhs cost on the father for his fraudulent actions of concealing the invalidation of...
The Supreme Court recently safeguarded the academic career of a medical student by regularizing her MBBS degree, even though it had been obtained on the basis of a Scheduled Tribe certificate submitted by her father, which was later invalidated by the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
The Court also imposed Rs. 5 Lakhs cost on the father for his fraudulent actions of concealing the invalidation of his community certificate on earlier occasions.
The bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan granted a relief to a student saying that her academic career could not be irreversibly damaged for a fault committed by her father..
“Having regard to the fact that the father has filed an undertaking that his daughter will never seek any benefit on the ground that she belongs to Scheduled Tribe and the father has also given an undertaking that no one in the family would seek any benefit of being members of the Scheduled Tribe, we regularise her admission in the MBBS Course.”, the Court said.
Briefly put, the appellant secured admission to MBBS in 2016 on the strength of a community certificate issued in 2009 certifying her as Mannervarlu (Scheduled Tribe). She completed her MBBS in 2021 and is presently pursuing postgraduate studies in the general category.
In 2022, after she had completed her MBBS degree, the Scrutiny Committee cancelled her community certificate, noting that her father and uncle's claims had been rejected as far back as 1989 and 1991. The Bombay High Court's dismissal of her plea against the committee's decision, which branded the case a “glaring example of patent fraud”, prompted her to approach the Supreme Court.
At the outset, the Supreme Court justified the High Court's decision. However, stating that the matter presented a precarious situation before it as dismissing the Appeal would end Appellant's entire career, the Court refrained from doing so, and granted one opportunity to the Appellant-student.
The Court noted that she had performed well in the MBBS Course and that her scores in Class 12 were also impressive.
“The matter presents before us a precarious situation.Here is a case where the appellant a meritorious student otherwise, has completed her MBBS course and is now pursuing her PG Course. If we dismiss this appeal, that will be the end of her entire career.”, the court said.
“We are conscious of the fact that equity should follow the law. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we thought fit to grant one opportunity to the appellant keeping only one thing in mind, i.e., her career and her life. One and all are responsible for this and we hold the father of the appellant more responsible for creating this imbroglio.”, the court added.
Accordingly, the appeal was partly allowed.
“In view of the aforesaid, we partly allow the appeal in the terms indicated hereinabove. Our present order, needless to say, will supersede the High Court Order. The net result is the appellant will not claim the status of “Mannervarlu” Scheduled Tribe ever in future. However, only her MBBS admission is regularised. On all other aspects, the High Court judgment is confirmed.”, the court ordered.
The Court also ordered the father of the petitioner to deposit Rs 5 lakhs with the National Defence Fund within a period of two months.
Cause Title: CHAITANYA VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 853
Click here to read/download the order
Appearances:
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Sudhanshu S Choudhari, Sr. Adv. Mr. R K Mendarkar, Adv. Mr. Vatsalya Vigya, AOR Ms. Gautami Yadav, Adv. Ms. Pranjal Chapalgaonkar, Adv. Mr. Yash Singhania, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Tripathi, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Abhikalp Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Ms. Aagam Kaur, Adv. Mr. Kartikey, Adv. Ms. Gayatri Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Sr. Adv. Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR