Children of private employees studying outside Himachal can lose quota: HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that the state is entitled to revise eligibility criteria for MBBS and BDS admissions, ruling that excluding students schooled outside the state is not arbitrary

The Himachal Pradesh High Court recently rejected a batch of writ petitions challenging the exclusion of some Himachali students from MBBS and BDS admissions under the state quota, reported LiveLaw.

 

The petitions were filed by students who had qualified the NEET-UG 2025 and were either bona fide Himachalis or children of bona fide Himachalis. They were denied admission to medical and dental colleges in Himachal Pradesh under the state quota because they had completed part of their schooling outside the state, owing to their parents’ private sector employment elsewhere.

 

A bench of Justice Ajay Mohan Goel upheld the exclusion, observing that the classification adopted by the state was reasonable.

 

 

"With respect to the private employees also, when once parents have moved outside in a private employment and wards obtaining education outside, they are not likely to come back, thus, their exclusion as aforestated footing cannot be said to be irrational or illegal," Justice Goel said, as quoted by LiveLaw. 

The petitioners argued that in earlier academic years, bona fide Himachali students and their children were eligible for state quota seats regardless of where they had studied. However, the court pointed out that the admission policy had since been amended by the state government and the university, tightening the eligibility conditions.

 

"The government which bears the financial burden of running government colleges, is entitled to lay down criteria for admission to its own colleges… provided classification is not arbitrary and has reasonable connection with the object of rules," the order read.

 

It also referred to a Supreme Court ruling which held that denying state quota medical admissions to students who studied outside the state due to their parents’ private sector employment is not arbitrary.

 

"This court cannot hold that the exclusion of this class in terms of the prospectus in issue is either arbitrary or discriminatory or unconstitutional. Therefore, in the light of the above observations, all these petitions are dismissed," the order noted.