Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1136 (AP)

Munjeti Pavani v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2025-10-30

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

body2025
ORDER : R. Raghunandan Rao, J. Heard Sri Ramesh Viswanathula, Nasaraiah Golla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Medical, Health & Family Welfare, Mrs. Tata Venkata Sridevi, the learned Standing Counsel for Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioners in this Writ Petition are working in the Medical Services of the State of Andhra Pradesh. They had studied up to intermediate, in the State of Andhra Pradesh and had pursued their MBBS in a College/University outside the State of Andhra Pradesh or in some cases, outside the country. After completing their MBBS degrees, they had joined the medical services of the State of Andhra Pradesh. All the petitioners had appeared for the NEET-PG examination, conducted for admission to P.G Medical Courses, for the year 2025-2026. The petitioners are seeking admission to the post graduate medical courses in the quota of seats set aside in the State quota, in both clinical and non-clinical P.G courses, in favour of in-service candidates, who had fulfilled the requirements, stipulated for candidates to be considered as in-service candidates. 3. The petitioners are aggrieved by the notification issued for admission into P.G Medical courses 2025-2026, dated 18.09.2025, on the ground that they were not being considered, in terms of the in-service quota alone and that the respondent-authorities were seeking to apply the provisions of the Presidential Order of 1974, which reserves 85% of the seats for local candidates with 15% being available for competition between local and non-local candidates. 4. The case of the petitioners is that all the seats, in various P.G courses, available in the State of Andhra Pradesh are divided into All India quota consisting of 50% of the seats and State quota consisting of the remaining 50% of the seats. The All India quota seats are filled up through National level counselling whereas 50% of the State quota seats are filled up through the 2 nd respondent - Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences. The 50% State quota is further divided into in-service quota and non-service quota, whereby, 30% of the clinical and 50% of non-clinical seats are allocated to in- service candidates who meet the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.150, dated 11.12.2021, as amended by G.O.Ms.No.85, dated 20.07.2024, and G.O.Ms.No.99, dated 18.08.2025. 5. NTR University of Health Sciences. The 50% State quota is further divided into in-service quota and non-service quota, whereby, 30% of the clinical and 50% of non-clinical seats are allocated to in- service candidates who meet the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.150, dated 11.12.2021, as amended by G.O.Ms.No.85, dated 20.07.2024, and G.O.Ms.No.99, dated 18.08.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the in-service quota, should be treated as a quota which is carved out of the 50% State quota and the Presidential Order, namely the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission) Order, 1974 cannot be made applicable to this quota. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the in-service candidates, are candidates who are already serving in various regions of the State of Andhra Pradesh and who would also give bonds, promising to serve, for a minimum period of 10 years, in the medical services of the State. The learned counsel would contend that in such circumstances, the petitioners herein, who are in-service candidates, and are residents of the State, would have to be treated for all practical purposes, as local candidates under the provisions of the Presidential Order as well as G.O.Ms.No.646, dated 10.07.1979, which had been issued for better implementation of the Presidential Order. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner apart from the aforesaid contention, would also contend that the State of Andhra Pradesh, while recruiting the petitioners, had defined a local area candidate as a person who had studied for a minimum period of four years up to the 10 th class. However, the State now seeks to place a fresh condition of studying of four years prior to the passing of MBBS. The learned counsel would submit that such a change in the definition of local area candidate, between the recruitment for Civil Assistant Surgeons and admission to P.G courses is impermissible and the same standard should be applied. 8. The attention of this Court was drawn to the notification No.4 of2022, issued by the Directorate of Public Health and Family Welfare, Andhra Pradesh, inviting applications from eligible candidates for the posts of Civil Assistant Surgeons. In this notification, the educational qualification for the said post was stipulated as MBBS degree examination or its equivalent included in Schedule-I of the MCI Act, 1956. For the purposes of this recruitment, the rule of reservation to local candidates was made applicable. In this notification, the educational qualification for the said post was stipulated as MBBS degree examination or its equivalent included in Schedule-I of the MCI Act, 1956. For the purposes of this recruitment, the rule of reservation to local candidates was made applicable. The definition of local candidate, for application of this rule of reservation was defined in the following manner: A. Definition of local candidate: i. “Local candidate” means a candidate for direct recruitment to any a post in relation to that Local areas where he/she has studied in Educational Institution(s) not less than four consecutive academic years prior to and including the year in which he/she appeared for SSC or its equivalent examination. If however, he/she has not studied in any educational Institution during the above four years period, it is enough if he/she has resided in that area which is claimed as his/her local area during the above said period. 9. The aforesaid definition, is clearly at variance from the definition of local candidate stipulated under the Presidential Order of 1975 which stipulates that wherever an educational qualification is stipulated for recruitment to any post, only a person who has studied for a minimum period of four years prior to the qualifying examination for such an educational qualification would be a local candidate. 10. Though we see a deviation, between the definition of a local candidate under the Presidential Order of 1975 and the definition of local candidate in the recruitment notification mentioned above, it would not be appropriate to extend the said deviation to the present notification for admission to P.G medical courses. The definition of „local candidate in the recruitment notification is not in accordance with the presidential order. However, that does not mean that the said deviation has to be accepted and the candidates recruited under such a deviation can claim exemption from the Presidential Order, in all further admissions to educational institutions. 11. The notification issued, for admission to P.G medical courses, clearly stipulates that a person would be treated as a local candidate, of a local area, only when such a person has studied for a minimum period of four years prior to the qualifying examination of MBBS. 11. The notification issued, for admission to P.G medical courses, clearly stipulates that a person would be treated as a local candidate, of a local area, only when such a person has studied for a minimum period of four years prior to the qualifying examination of MBBS. We do not think it would be permissible, in the face of the categorical definition set out in the notification as well as the Presidential Order, to permit the candidates who do not fulfill the above criteria, to be treated as local candidates, only on the ground that there had been a deviation from the Presidential Order earlier. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the concept of in-service candidates, and reservation, of a percentage of the available P.G medical seats, for such in-service candidates, had been considered by the Honble Supreme Court of India in the case of Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association & Others. Vs. Union of India & Others , [(2011) 6 SCC 568] wherein the reservation of a certain percentage of seats in favour of in- service candidates had been upheld with certain stipulations such as minimum service in rural, remote or difficult areas for a specified period being mandatory and to ensure that candidates who complete courses continue to serve in such areas. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that in view of the said judgment, a separate category of reservation has been created, and the said category would have to be placed outside the provisions of the Presidential Order and the Government Orders which have been issued for implementation of the Presidential Order. 13. The notification, dated 18.09.2025, stipulates reservation in favour of local candidates, in the following manner : 3. RESERVATION IN FAVOUR OF THE LOCAL CANDIDATES: Admission to 85% of the seats shall be reserved in favour of the local candidates in relation to the local area as provided in A.P. Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission) order, 1974 for Non-State wide courses as given in Annexure-III of GO (P) No. 646, Edu. (W1) Department, dt. 10-7-1979. 3.1 As per Memo No.2459247/C1/2024, HM&FW (C1) Dept., dt.20-07-2024 Govt. of A.P. it is hereby clarified that all the 15% of the Unreserved scats in Medical/Dental colleges are now reserved exclusively for the Local candidates from the Andhra and Rayalaseema regions. (W1) Department, dt. 10-7-1979. 3.1 As per Memo No.2459247/C1/2024, HM&FW (C1) Dept., dt.20-07-2024 Govt. of A.P. it is hereby clarified that all the 15% of the Unreserved scats in Medical/Dental colleges are now reserved exclusively for the Local candidates from the Andhra and Rayalaseema regions. Non-Local (NL) Candidates are not eligible for PG (Medical) Local seats in the State of Andhra Pradesh. NL Candidates with AP Domicile (APNL) are eligible for APUR seats in the State of Andhra Pradesh. 14. The term “local candidates” is defined in clause 3.4 of the notification. The said definition is a replication of the definition of local candidate in the presidential order and G.O.Ms.No.646, dated 10.07.1979, which had been issued for implementation of the Presidential Order. Clause 3.4 clearly stipulates that only a candidate who has studied in the local area, for not less than four consecutive academic years ending with academic years in which he/she appeared or, as the case may be, first appeared in the relevant qualifying examination. The aforesaid stipulation clearly mandates that only candidates who have studied MBBS degree, in the local area, would qualify as local candidates for whom 85% of the seats are reserved. The notification also provides for seats being reserved for in-service candidates, as set out in clause 4.1. Clause 4.2 sets out the eligibility criteria for the in- service quota. This clause does not refer to the reservation set out for local candidates under clause 3 of the notification or the manner in which local candidates are to be decided under clause 3.4. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioners, is calling upon this Court to split the notification into a notification of in-service candidates to whom the reservation under clause 3 would be applicable and in-service candidates to whom such a reservation would not be applicable. We are afraid that we cannot segregate these two categories of candidates and hold that the reservation for local candidates, set out in clause 3 would apply only to non- service candidates and would not apply to in-service candidates. Neither the scheme of the notification nor the provisions of the notification give any indication of such a distinction between the two categories. A reading of the entire notification makes it clear that the reservation for local candidates, set out in clause 3, would be applicable to all applications, including non-service and in-service candidates. 16. Neither the scheme of the notification nor the provisions of the notification give any indication of such a distinction between the two categories. A reading of the entire notification makes it clear that the reservation for local candidates, set out in clause 3, would be applicable to all applications, including non-service and in-service candidates. 16. In these circumstances, we are unable to accept the contentions of the petitioners. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.