Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, doctors aspiring to appear for NEET-PG 2022, challenged the deadline for completion of internship set by the National Board of Examination. Initially, the Information Bulletin dated 15 January 2022 required internship completion by 31 May 2022. On 8 February 2022, the Supreme Court permitted the petitioners to submit a representation to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, which led to an extension of the cut-off date to 31 July 2022. The petitioners still aggrieved argued that due to COVID-19 duties, internships in some states commenced late (e.g., Kerala in August 2021, Bihar in October 2021), making it impossible to complete by 31 July 2022. They sought further extension or counting of COVID-19 duty period towards internship. The respondents contended that any further extension would disrupt the examination schedule (exams on 21 May 2022, counselling in July, classes from 1 August 2022) and that COVID-19 duties do not cover all specialties. The Court held that prescribing cut-off dates is a policy domain of the executive and regulatory authorities, and courts should be circumspect in interfering with academic policies unless they are plainly arbitrary or discriminatory. Relying on precedents (IIT Kharagpur v. Soutrik Sarangi, AICTE v. Surinder Kumar Dhawan, Rachna v. Union of India, State of Bihar v. Ramjee Prasad), the Court found that the extension to 31 July 2022 was a reasonable response to representations and not arbitrary. The Court dismissed the petition, noting that whenever a cut-off is extended, some students fall on the other side, and that cannot be a ground for judicial interference.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Judicial Review - Academic Policy - Courts should be circumspect in exercising judicial review over academic policies including admission criteria, unless shown to be plainly arbitrary or discriminatory (Paras 9-10). B) Administrative Law - Policy Decision - Cut-off Date - A cut-off date cannot be held to be arbitrary unless it is shown to be unreasonable, capricious or whimsical; mere hardship to some candidates does not make it arbitrary (Para 12). C) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Mandamus - Courts cannot issue mandamus to direct the government to come out with a specific policy granting relaxation to certain candidates as a matter of right (Para 10). D) Medical Education - NEET-PG Eligibility - Internship Deadline - The extension of cut-off date from 31 May 2022 to 31 July 2022 by the National Board of Examination after considering representations is a policy decision within the domain of executive and regulatory authorities (Paras 4, 11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the cut-off date of 31 July 2022 for completion of internship for NEET-PG 2022 eligibility is arbitrary and should be further extended, and whether the period spent on COVID-19 duties should be counted towards internship requirements.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the cut-off date of 31 July 2022 is a policy decision within the domain of the executive and regulatory authorities, and not arbitrary. The Court declined to interfere further.
Law Points
- Judicial restraint in academic policy
- Cut-off date not arbitrary unless unreasonable or capricious
- Policy decisions within executive domain
- Mandamus cannot be issued to frame specific policy
