The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a batch of pleas filed against the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling which had quashed a Punjab government notification allowing distant relatives to avail of the NRI admission quota benefits in the state's medical colleges.
A bench, headed by CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, refusing to interfere with the high court order, observed that the "NRI quota business must be stopped now".
"All these petition petitions are dismissed. Let us put a lid on this. This fraud has come to an end. This NRI business is nothing but a fraud," remarked CJI Chandrachud.
The Bench, also comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, was dealing with three petitions, including a petition filed by the Punjab government, against the high court’s ruling quashing the notification issued to accommodate candidates under NRI quota, who are either the wards or the nearest relation of NRIs, including the brother or sister of the father, the brother or sister of the mother, the father and mother of father, the father and mother of the mother, and first degree paternal/maternal cousins.
The Punjab government, on August 20, modified the provisions to the extent that candidates who are the ward/nearest relation of NRI may avail of the benefit of NRI quota seats, in case NRI seats are left vacant.
After several petitions were filed before the high court, a bench headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu passed an ad-interim order staying the operation of modified provisions and ordered that the process of admission to medical courses be continued in accordance with the original schedule.
In its decision, the high court questioned the criterion that had been laid down to evaluate the guardianship of the NRI and said that "the evaluation of guardianship is so vague that it is apparent that the process is not wholly transparent".
"If the admissions in the expanded NRI category to include non-genuine NRIs are permitted; the prohibition made on charge of capitation fee would serve no higher purpose, as the state/private colleges would be at liberty to reap the benefits by amending the provisions according to their whims," it said.
Before the high court, general category candidates contended that modified provisions were issued after the last date for submission of the application under the NRI category had come to an end. Once the last date for submitting the application forms was over, the issuance of the corrigendum, which resulted in changing the rules of admission midway after the admission had begun, was not appropriate, they contended.