1. These three writ petitions since involve common question, as such, all are disposed of by the present order.
2. The petitioners, in the present writ petitions, have challenged the seat matrix for counselling and admission in Ayurveda Vachaspati/Ayurveda
Dhanwantari - MD/MS (Ayurveda) for the Academic Session 2020-21. They also seek direction to make appropriate changes in the seat allotment
for admission in Post Graduate Course of MD/MS (Ayurveda) for the Academic Session 2020-21 by keeping in mind the law laid down by the Apex
Court in the case of Saurabh Chaudri & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2013) 11 SCC 146.
3. All the petitioners have passed the Ayurvedacharya Degree, also known as 'Bachelor of Ayurveda Medicine & Surgery' (in short 'BAMS') from
different colleges affiliated to Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur. The petitioners claim themselves to be eligible for
admission in Post- Graduate Courses, after participating in the common entrance examination to all medical institutions at the Post-Graduate level
namely - All India AYUSH PG Entrance Test (in short 'AIAPGET') conducted by the National Testing Agency (NTA).
4. All the petitioners being eligible to appear in the AIAPGET, participated in the said examination and result thereof was declared on 04.11.2020.
5. The petitioners have pleaded that for the purpose of admission, counselling was held by the designated authority, appointed by the respective States
for State Quota Seats and the Central Government for All India Quota Seats.
6. The petitioners have pleaded that till the Academic Session 2019-20, counselling was conducted by Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan
Ayurved University, Jodhpur and the National Institute of Ayurveda (NIA) was an institute/college affiliated to Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan
Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur till Academic Session 2019-20 and on 09.11.2020, the National Institute of Ayurveda attained the status of a
'Deemed University'.
7. The Counselling Board, National Institute of Ayurveda issued prospectus and provided seat matrix for the year 2020-21 and there were in total 65
seats for PG Counselling, out of which 21 seats were for the Central/State Government in-service candidates and the remaining 44 seats were for
Rajasthan State candidates which were also bifurcated into two categories i.e. 22 seats for the candidates who passed out their graduation course
from the University of Rajasthan/Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur/National Institute of Ayurveda and 22 seats
were allocated to National Institute of Ayurveda passed out (fresh candidates). The seat matrix, as published, by the respondent is quota hereunder:-
RAJASTHAN STATE CANDIDATES (Only for UOR/Dr.S.R.R.A.U/NIA and NIA Passed Out Fresh Candidates) Category UOR/ NIA Passed
Out Dr.S.R.R.A.U/NIA (Fresh Candidates) Grand Total - 44
8. The definition of 'NIA Passed Out (fresh candidate)', according to the prospectus, is of a candidate who has completed his BAMS & Internship
from National Institute of Ayurveda after the last cut off date of AIAPGET, 2019 and the fresh candidate was also required to complete BAMS and
Internship from the erstwhile National Institute of Ayurveda between 01.11.2019 to 30.09.2020.
9. The petitioners have pleaded that they are not eligible for seats reserved for National Institute of Ayurveda Passed Out (Fresh Candidates), as
some of the petitioners have passed out from the National Institute of Ayurveda in the year 2016 and internship certificate has been issued to them in
the year 2017 (e.g. petitioner-Dr.Rafique Khan in CWP No.245/2021). Likewise, the petitioners in CWP Nos.34/2021 & 43/2021 have also done their
graduation course in Ayurveda from the National Institute of Ayurveda affiliated to Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University,
Jodhpur and, as such, they were also not treated to be the National Institute of Ayurveda Passed Out (Fresh Candidates).
10. The grievance of the petitioners is that undue and illegal advantage has been given to the students who have completed BAMS i.e. Under
Graduate course from the National Institute of Ayurveda and further admission is confined to only such candidates, who have completed their Under
Graduate course and internship from the National Institute of Ayurveda in 2019-20. Further grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent, in the
garb of institutional preference, has conferred benefit by giving preferential treatment to the students, who have obtained Under Graduate degrees
from a particular institution and the same is contrary to the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Saurabh Chaudri (supra).
11. Counsel for the petitioners have made following submissions:-
11A. Institutional preference to the students of National Institute of Ayurveda (prior to attaining the status of Deemed University) is being granted by
forming a separate category and such category is completely artificial and imaginative.
11B. National Institute of Ayurveda (Deemed University) did not exist prior to November, 2020 and there cannot be any academic continuity or
institutional preference. Degrees to all the students of Under Graduate Courses like petitioners or other students of National Institute of Ayurveda
College, were issued by Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur and even the said University will continue to issue
degrees for the next four years to the batches currently undergoing studies and as such, discrimination cannot be made by the respondent amongst the
similarly situated students.
11C. There is no intelligible differentia between the petitioners and any other students of National Institute of Ayurveda, whether fresh or old. The
National Institute of Ayurveda College had the same academic standards, courses and other methods of imparting education and the same was not
distinct and different from other students who had completed the Under Graduate courses in the State of Rajasthan prior to 2020.
11D. Institutional preference is permissible only to the extent of 50% of the seats and rest 50% are to be calculated on residual seats, which come to
the Institution after All India Quota is consumed.
11E. The seat matrix of 22 seats has been exclusively reserved for fresh candidates of National Institute of Ayurveda and another stream, for 22
seats, is open for old students of National Institute of Ayurveda to contest along with the students of other Universities and as such, the percentage of
institutional preference will go beyond 50%. 11F. The respondent ought to consider 'merit' as the only criterion for Post Graduate Courses and only on
the basis of the students passed out from a particular institution, seats should not be earmarked for them.
11G. The reservation of seats for National Institute of Ayurveda passed out (Fresh Candidates) is arbitrary, discriminatory and in violation of Article
14 of the Constitution of India, as in the present case institutional reservation means giving preference to the students' alumni. 11H. The National
Institute of Ayurveda has not framed any Rules, Regulations or statutory provisions in accordance with law in regard to reservation of seats in relation
to the National Institute of Ayurveda passed out (Fresh Candidates) and in absence of such provisions, the entire action is vitiated in the eyes of law.
12. Counsel for the petitioners in support of their contentions have placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in
Dr.Chahat Bhatia Vs. Government Medical College & Hospital, Chandigarh (CWP No.8962/2018[O&M]) and other connected writ petitions dated
15.05.2018, judgments rendered by the Apex Court in the case of State of UP & Ors. Vs. Dr.Dinesh Singh Chauhan reported in (2016) 9 SCC 749
and AIIMS Students Union Vs. AIIMS & Ors. reported in AIR 2001 SC 3262.
13. Mr.Anurag Agarwal, appearing for the respondent has filed reply to the writ petition. The respondent has averred that the National Institute of
Ayurveda is as Institute which is 100% funded by the Government of India and the same has now become a 'Deemed University'. The members of
the governing body of National Institute of Ayurveda (Deemed University) held a meeting on 03.12.2020 and the said governing body approved and
permitted the Institute to make admission on its own level in different courses from the Academic Session 2020-21 and the seat matrix was also
approved by the governing body which has been placed on record as Annexure-R/3. The respondent has approved the seat matrix allotting 44 seats
for the candidates of State of Rajasthan, out of which 22 seats were earmarked for the candidates of University of Rajasthan and Dr.Sarvepalli
Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University and the rest 22 seats for the National Institute of Ayurveda passed out fresh candidates, who have
completed their internship between 01.11.2019 to 30.09.2020. The respondent has also averred that institutional reservation and institutional continuity
in education is provided to the students of the National Institute of Ayurveda, as per the law laid down by the Apex Court. The respondent has further
averred that other Universities have also provided same reservation for the institutional students and they have referred to the information brochure of
the Banaras Hindu University, placed on record as Annexure-R/2 where 50% of the total seats have been reserved for institutional candidates, who
have passed final Professional BAMS Examination from the Faculty of Ayurveda, IMS, BHU.
14. Counsel for the respondent Mr.Anurag Agarwal further submitted that 50% institutional reservation is permitted under the law and accordingly,
the decision was taken by the governing body and no fault can be found with the decision making process adopted by the respondent.
15. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance perused the material available on record.
16. This Court finds that seat matrix, which has been prepared, as per the decision of the governing body of the respondent, provides that 22 seats will
be filled from the National Institute of Ayurveda passed out fresh candidates. This Court further finds that if 22 seats out of 44 seats have been
earmarked for the National Institute of Ayurveda passed out fresh candidates, the respondent has not committed any illegality and such 50% seats for
the institutional continuity is permissible under the law.
17. This Court had occasion to consider the issue of institutional preference/institutional continuity in the case of Dr.Simple Gupta Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Anr. [S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.5227/2020] decided on 10.09.2020 and after considering the law laid down by the Apex Court, this
Court held that the authorities are free to prescribe institution-wise reservation but the same should not exceed the limit of 50%, as approved by the
Apex Court in the case of Saurabh Chaudri (supra). The relevant portion of the order dt.10.09.2020, passed by this Court, is quoted hereunder:-
34. This Court further holds that 50% of seats which are meant to be filled from non-service candidates cannot be filled on the basis of qualification
acquired by the candidates only from the State of Rajasthan and the respondent-State is required to consider the merit of such candidates who want to
apply for the said course.
35. This Court further holds that the State is always free to prescribe any other reasonable condition like other States have prescribed condition of
domicile/resident of a particular State, however, 100% institution-wise reservation is not permissible in the eye of law.
36. This Court further finds that the State is always free to prescribe institution-wise reservation but the same should not exceed the limit of 50% as
has been approved by the Apex Court in the case of Saurabh Chaudri (supra).
37. Accordingly, the present writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The eligibility condition of having passed MBBS Degree from the College
situated in the State of Rajasthan is declared illegal and the same is set aside. The respondents are further permitted to make appropriate provision of
providing institution-wise reservation to the extent of 50% and the remaining 50% seats, from the non- service category candidate, should be filled
from the candidates who have applied for the same and who stand higher in merit, as per the criteria evolved by the State by taking into account the
marks secured in NEET PG Examination, 2020.
18. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the National Institute of Ayurveda has become 'Deemed University' only in the year
2020 and as such, no artificial distinction can be made between the candidates who have done their Graduation prior to the year 2020 and all the
colleges were affiliated to Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur, this Court finds that if the National Institute of
Ayurveda (NIA) was having affiliation with Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur and education was imparted to the
Under Graduate students of NIA by NIA only, the respondent has the valid justification to carve out such category for NIA passed out fresh
candidates to give them institutional preference. Imparting of education, in a particular College/Institute or for that matter different Colleges having
affiliation with one University, may not deprive that College which may later on become University to give preference to its own students, who have
done their Graduation Course from such College.
19. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that against remaining 22 seats, which are open for those students who have passed out from
the University of Rajasthan or Dr.Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur, the chances of admission are curtailed, this Court
finds that the students who are not NIA passed out fresh students, they can participate in the counselling against such seats and if they fall in the order
of merit, their admissions can be accordingly made.
20. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that respondent has not kept in mind the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of
Saurabh Chaudri (supra), this Court finds that the Apex Court has permitted 50% seat by way of institutional preference and as such, that ceiling is
not breached by the respondent in the present case, while taking decision.
21. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Dr.Chahat Bhatia (supra) has held
that 50% institutional preference should be restricted to such of the seats, falling to the share of the Institution, after remaining seats are consumed in
the All India Quota, this Court finds that in the present case, the seat matrix which has been given, excludes the seats of Central/State Government in-
service candidate as 21 seats out of 65 total seats and against the remaining 44 seats, institutional preference has been given on 50% seats i.e. 22
seats for the National Institute of Ayurveda passed out fresh candidates, this Court finds that no illegality has been committed by the respondent while
issuing the seat matrix and they have also followed the law laid down by the Apex Court.
22. Consequently, the present writ petitions being devoid of any force, accordingly stand dismissed. No costs.
