The Rajasthan High Court (HC), today, March 12, heard a petition challenging the allocation of seats in Round 3 of the NEET-PG 2024 state counselling in Rajasthan. The court has deferred the matter until after Monday, March 17.
During the hearing today, the court reviewed a notification from the National Medical Commission (NMC) dated March 5, which was submitted by the counsel representing the state.
However, the petitioners' legal counsel, Tanvi Dubey, pointed out that their original writ was filed before the issuance of this notification. Consequently, the judges directed them to amend their petition to challenge the March 5 notification as well.
“The counsel submitted a notification from the NMC dated March 5. Since our writ was filed before this notification, the judges directed us to amend our writ and challenge this notice as well. Yesterday, the court was quite firm in questioning the rules and procedures. The matter has now been posted for hearing after the vacations, which means after Monday," Advocate Tanvi Dubey informed EdexLive.
In the previous hearing, the court had questioned the rules and procedures governing the counselling process and had asked the state to submit the official notification under which it was conducting the second stray or special stray round of counselling.
With the matter now scheduled for hearing after the court vacations, petitioners will have to wait longer for a verdict, even as seat allotments continue as per the existing counselling process.
Background
The writ petition was filed on February 12 by MBBS graduates who appeared for the NEET-PG 2024 exam and participated in the ongoing state counselling process.
The petitioners have alleged that vacant seats remaining after Round 3 were not made available to all eligible candidates holding an MBBS degree and were instead moved directly to the stray round, preventing them from participating.
According to the petitioners’ counsel, Tanvi Dubey, the current seat allocation process has placed deserving candidates at a disadvantage. Many petitioners are either unable to secure a seat or are being offered the same seats at exorbitant costs. Furthermore, they argue that moving the remaining seats directly to the stray round benefits candidates with significantly lower ranks, creating an unfair gap in the process.
The Rajasthan HC had previously directed the state to submit the notification under which it was conducting the second stray or special stray round.
The petitioners argue that the system in place is unfair and restricts their ability to compete for available seats, potentially impacting their medical careers.
