(1.) This writ petition is an offshoot of the decision rendered by us in Dr. Pradip Jain v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 1420). The main judgment in that case was delivered by us on 22nd June, 1984 and we held in that judgment that "wholesale reservation made by some of the State Governments on the basis of 'domicile' or residence requirement within the State or on the basis of institutional preference for students who have passed the qualifying examination held by the University or the State, excluding all students not satisfying this requirement, regardless of merit" was unconstitutional and void as offending the equality clause of the Constitution. But after condemning such wholesale reservation, we proceeded to observe that the very mandate of the equality clause viewed in the perspective of social justice, would justify some extent of reservation based on residence requirement within the State or on institutional preference for students passing the qualifying examination held by the University or the State and addressing ourselves to the question as to what extent such reservation might be regarded as constitutionally permissible, we said:
(2.) We pointed out that in the result "at least 30 per cent of the open seats shall be available for admission of students on All India basis irrespective of the State or University from which they come and directed that "such admissions shall be granted purely on merit on the basis of either All India Entrance Examination or entrance examination to be held by the State." This was the decision given by us in regard to admissions to the MBBS and BDS courses. We then proceeded to discuss the question of admissions to post graduate. courses such as MD, MS and the like. We leaned heavily on the observations made by Krishna Iyer J. in Jagdish Saran v. Union of India (1980) 2 SCR 831 as also on the recommendation by the Indian Medical Council and the opinion expressed by the Medical Education Review Committee where an opinion was clearly expressed that admissions to post graduate courses in any institution should be guided strictly by merit and should be open to candidates on All India basis. We also referred to the Policy Statement of the Government of India filed by the learned Attorney General where the view was expressed categorically by the Government of India that so far as admissions to the institutions of postgraduate Colleges and such professional colleges are concerned, they should be entirely on the basis of all India merit, subject only to constitutional reservations in favour of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. However, taking into account broader considerations of equality of opportunity and institutional continuity in education which has its own importance and value, we took the view that though residence requirement within the State should not be a ground for reservation in admissions to post graduate courses, a certain percentage of seats may in the present circumstances, be reserved on the basis of institutional preference "in the sense that a student who has passed M.B.B.S. course from a medical college may be given preference for admission to post graduate course in the same medical college or University but such reservation on the basis of institutional preference should not in any event exceed 50% of the total number of open seats available for admission to the post graduate course."
(3.) This judgment was delivered on 22nd June, 1984, but by that time, admissions had already been made in the medical colleges attached to some of the Universities in the country and moreover it was felt that some time would be required for the purpose of achieving uniformity in the procedure relating to admissions in various Universities. Some of the students seeking admission to the M.B.B.S. course in the academic year 1984-85, therefore, made an application to the Court in Civil Appeal No. 6392 of 1983, Rita Nirankari v. University of Delhi, that the judgment delivered by us may be given effect only from the academic year 1985-86. We accordingly issued notice on the application to the learned advocates who had appeared on behalf of the various parties at the hearing of Dr. Pradip Jain's case as also to the Attorney General and after hearing them, we came to the conclusion that "in view of the fact that all formalities for admission, including the holding of entrance examination, have been completed in some of the States prior to the judgment dated 22nd June 1984 and also since some time would be required for making the necessary preparations for implementing the judgment", it was not practicable to give effect to the judgment from the academic year 1984-85. We therefore directed that the judgment shall be implemented with effect from the academic year 1985-86. This order was made by us on 26th July 1984 and it was directed to form part of the main judgment dated 22nd June 1984.