Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Priyansh Jain vs Union Of India on 25 February, 2020
Bench: Ashok Bhushan, Navin Sinha
ITEM NO.21 COURT NO.9 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).20692/2019
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-07-2019
in WPC No.6827/2019 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi)
PRIYANSH JAIN Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No.138359/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
WITH
SLP(C) No.19773/2019 (XIV)
(IA No. 124119/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES)
Date : 25-02-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Mishra Saurabh, AOR
Mr. Anuja Pethia, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, AOR
Mr. Harsh Mishra, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, ASG
Mrs. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Jai A. Dehadri, Adv.
Mr. S.S. Rebello, Adv.
Ms. Arzu, Adv.
Ms. Riya, Adv.
Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Sharma, AOR
Mr. Dhawal Mohan, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Digitally signed by
ARJUN BISHT
Date: 2020.02.26
16:59:33 IST
Reason: Mr. Rahul Kaushik, AOR
Ms. Bhuvneshwari Pathak, Adv.
Ms. Shilpi Satyapriya Satyam, Adv.
1
Mr. Rahul Khatri, Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
These special leave petitions have been filed against the judgment of the Delhi High Court dated 29.07.2019 in Writ Petition(C) No.6827/2019. The Writ Petition(C) No.6827/2019 was filed by the private medical institution praying for a mandamus to the Medical Council of India for granting approval of additional intake of 25% seats under the EWS category floated by Medical Council of India for the academic session 2019-2020. The High Court by the impugned judgment has dismissed the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the appellants contends that 10% reservation for EWS category was consequent to Constitution (103 rd) Amendment Act amending Articles 15(6). By referring to letter dated 25.06.2019, issued by Medical Council of India, it is contended that the said policy also was to cover the self-financing institution. He submits that the Government of India has not finalized any concrete policy to be implemented in the State of Madhya Pradesh and other States so that the private institutions under self-financing mode may also benefited with the scheme.
Mr. Nadkarni, learned ASG, appearing for the Union of India submits that the question of formulation of policy is underway since it requires consultation within various departments of the Government of India and with regard to the academic year 2021-2022 the Government of India shall take an appropriate decision. 2 Mr. Nadkarni, learned ASG, submits that as far as the policy, which has been invoked with regard to 2019-2020 was only with regard to the Government institutions, Government aided institutions and those who were receiving any kind of aid under PPP mode. The writ petition, which was filed in the Delhi High Court, was with regard to academic session 2019-2020. The High Court dismissed the writ petition.
The statement having been made before us that Government of India is formulating appropriate policy to implement 10% reservation for EWS category of candidates for the year 2021-2022, we are of the view that nothing more is to be decided in these special leave petitions. However, as stated by learned ASG, the Government of India may take an appropriate decision with regard to 10% reservation for EWS category with respect to session 2021-2022 on or before 30.06.2020.
The special leave petitions are dismissed with the above observations.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(ARJUN BISHT) (RENU KAPOOR)
COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
3