Dr. Astha Goel and Ors. vs. The Medical Counselling Committee & Ors.
Background
After NEET-PG-2021 counselling, roughly 1,456 out of 40,000 postgraduate medical seats remained vacant even after eight to nine rounds of All India Quota and State Quota counselling. Several unsuccessful candidates approached the Supreme Court (directly under Article 32, or after losing in High Courts) asking for one more "Special Stray Round" of counselling so they could be admitted to these leftover seats. The Medical Counselling Committee and Union of India opposed this, saying most of the vacant seats were unwanted non-clinical seats that go vacant every year, and that the admission software and security deposits had already been closed and refunded.
Decision Breakdown
The Court dismissed the petitions, relying on its earlier rulings in Supreet Batra v. Union of India and Education Promotion Society for India v. Union of India, which held that some seats going vacant every year (mostly unpopular non-clinical seats) is not by itself a reason to reopen or extend a counselling schedule, and that admitting students mid-session disrupts medical education. The Court held the schedule for medical admissions must be strictly followed; reopening it now would delay the already-approaching NEET-PG-2022 counselling cycle and could compromise the quality of medical education and, ultimately, public health. It found the government's decision not to hold a further round was not arbitrary.
Lesson Learnt
Courts will not order additional rounds of medical admission counselling merely because some seats (typically unpopular, non-clinical ones) remain vacant after the prescribed rounds are completed: strict adherence to admission timelines is treated as essential to protect the standard of medical education and public health.