Delhi High Court Delivers Split Verdict On De-Reservation Of Vacant OBC Medical Seat: Refers To Chief Justice

Owing to the divergence of opinion between the two Judges constituting the Division Bench, the matter has now been referred to the Chief Justice for placement before a Third Judge or a Full Bench.

The Court was hearing an intra-court appeal filed by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences, challenging the judgment of a Single Judge directing de-reservation of an OBC seat in the Post Diploma DNB Radiodiagnosis course and its allotment to eligible unreserved candidates on merit to prevent wastage of a medical seat.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Om Prakash Shukla and Justice C. Hari Shankar, held: “As we have not been able to arrive at a consensus regarding the course of action to be followed in the present case, the following point of difference is referred to the Hon’ble Chief Justice, to be placed before the learned Third Judge or before a Full Bench, as the Hon’ble Chief Justice would deem appropriate:

Whether the learned Single Judge was correct in his decision to direct de-reservation of the Radiodiagnosis seat in the Government Hospital Panchkula, which was reserved for an OBC category candidate, and to throw it open to Unreserved category candidates, in the facts of the present case, keeping in mind the legal position?”

Senior Advocate Kirtiman Singh appeared for the Appellant, National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences. Advocate Amarjit Singh Bedi appeared for the first respondent-student. The Union of India was represented by CGSC Mukul Singh.

Background

The dispute arose from counselling for admission to the DNB Post Diploma Centralised Entrance Test (PDCET) 2025 for the Radiodiagnosis speciality. The first respondent, an unreserved category candidate who secured 142nd rank in the Radiodiagnosis stream, had opted for Government Hospital, Panchkula, as her first preference. However, the sole seat available in the hospital was reserved for the OBC category.

The candidate claimed that since no eligible OBC candidate had qualified for the seat during counselling, the seat ought to be de-reserved and offered to unreserved category candidates to avoid wastage. She rejected the alternative seat allotted to her in another institution and sought allotment of the vacant Panchkula seat.

Before the Single Judge, the National Board of Examinations contended that it lacked authority to convert the OBC seat into an unreserved seat and relied upon Clause 4.6 of the counselling handbook as well as minutes of its Accreditation Committee meeting providing that vacant Post Diploma DNB seats would eventually be transferred into the NEET-PG pool.

The Single Judge, however, held that the restriction in Clause 4.6 applied only to conversion between reserved categories and not conversion into the unreserved category. It was further held that the decision regarding transfer of seats to the NEET-PG pool would arise only after completion of counselling rounds. Accordingly, the Single Judge directed de-reservation of the seat and its offer to eligible candidates on merit.

Aggrieved thereby, the National Board preferred the present appeal.

Court’s Observation

Justice Om Prakash Shukla: Vacant Reserved Seat Can Be De-Reserved To Prevent Wastage

Justice Om Prakash Shukla upheld the core reasoning of the Single Judge and observed that courts have consistently stressed that medical seats should not go vacant, particularly where no eligible reserved category candidate is available.

The Court noted that both sides themselves accepted the principle that medical seats should not remain vacant, though they differed on the mechanism to achieve that objective. While the respondent sought de-reservation of the seat, the appellant sought its transfer into the NEET-PG pool.

Justice Shukla extensively relied upon precedents, including Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008), P.V. Indiresan (2) v. Union of India (2011), Sanchi Dilavri v. University of Delhi and Archana Thakur v. State of Himachal Pradesh, to hold that vacant OBC seats may be converted into unreserved seats once eligible reserved category candidates are exhausted.

The Court observed: “Clearly, the courts in our country have stressed from time to time that medical seats should not be wasted. There is no doubt that reservation as a constitutional right be given full opportunity but once there is no eligible candidate available, wasting the seat would not serve the purpose of reservation.”

It further held: “Leaving the seat vacant would not benefit reserved category, because no eligible candidate is available, neither it would benefit the public. Therefore, in these circumstances, once there is no eligible reserved candidate available, wastage of seat would lead to obstruction of public interest.”

Justice Shukla reasoned that transferring the seat directly into the NEET-PG pool before exhausting counselling options for Post Diploma candidates would defeat the very purpose for which such specialised seats had been created.

The Court further observed that the Minutes of Meeting relied upon by the appellant contemplated transfer of seats into the NEET-PG pool only after completion of all counselling rounds and therefore did not prohibit de-reservation during the ongoing counselling process.

On the issue of authority competent to de-reserve the seat, Justice Shukla held that since the seat formed part of the All India Quota, the Central Government would be the appropriate authority to decide de-reservation.

Accordingly, Justice Shukla partly upheld the Single Judge’s view while modifying the direction to clarify that the Union Government, and not the National Board of Examinations, would be the competent authority to decide de-reservation of the seat.

Justice C. Hari Shankar: Courts Cannot Judicially De-Reserve Reserved Seats

Justice C. Hari Shankar, however, disagreed with the reasoning adopted by Justice Shukla and the Single Judge, holding that courts cannot direct de-reservation of a reserved seat merely because it may otherwise remain vacant.

The Court observed: “The highest, the Court can recommend or suggest to the competent executive authority is to consider whether the seat can be dereserved. Directing dereservation would, in my view, transgress the legitimate boundaries of our jurisdiction.”

Justice Hari Shankar expressed concern that judicial de-reservation of reserved seats could create uncertainty and disorder in the admission process. The Court noted that several candidates may have consciously refrained from applying for the seat because they were aware that it was reserved for OBC candidates.

The Judge observed: “There may have been countless others who may not, rightfully, have applied for the seat, so that the direction of the learned Single Judge, to allot it to the most meritorious unreserved category candidate, may itself result in injustice.”

Justice Hari Shankar further held that the Court could not interfere with the decision of the Accreditation Committee regarding transfer of vacant seats into the NEET-PG pool, especially when no specific challenge had been laid to that policy decision.

The Court cautioned that judicially directing de-reservation of reserved seats in the absence of statutory authority could create complete uncertainty in counselling processes and reservation administration.

Conclusion

As the two Judges differed on the legality of directing the de-reservation of the OBC-reserved Radiodiagnosis seat and its allotment to unreserved candidates, the matter was directed to be placed before the Chief Justice for the constitution of an appropriate Bench.

The Registry was accordingly directed to place the matter before the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.

Cause Title: National Board of Examinations In Medical Sciences v. Dr Aditi Panwar & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:4414-DB)

Appearances

Appellants: Kirtiman Singh, Senior Advocate; Advocates Waize Ali Noor, Mrinal Kumar Sharma, Shashi Suman, Varun Rajawat and Zillur Rahman

Respondents: Mukul Singh, CGSC; Advocates Amarjit Singh Bedi, Varun Chandiok, Riya Seth and Armaan Sharma, Aryan Dhaka, T. Singhdev, Abhijit Chakravarty, Yamini Singh, Tanishq Srivastava, Vedant Sood, Bhanu Gulati and Ramanpreet

Click here to read/download Judgment