Chhattisgarh High Court Cancels Earlier Medical PG Seat Allotments, Orders Fresh Counselling Under Revised Rules

The ruling was delivered by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal while disposing of a batch of petitions challenging the cancellation of PG medical counselling held earlier this year. The court made it clear that no further petitions on the same issue will be entertained, bringing legal finality to the admission process.

The case arose after the state government, through orders dated January 22 and 23, 2026, annulled an already completed counselling process and seat allotments for PG medical courses across government and private colleges in Chhattisgarh. The decision affected several candidates who had already joined their allotted institutions.

One such petitioner, Bhilai resident Anushka Yadav, approached the High Court contending that her admission to a Radiodiagnosis seat in a private medical college was secured purely on merit. She argued that she had deposited ₹10.79 lakh as fees along with a ₹10 lakh bank guarantee and formally joined the course, making the subsequent cancellation arbitrary and unjustified.

The petitioner maintained that once the admission process is completed, cancelling it retrospectively violates principles of fairness and jeopardises students’ careers. She sought restoration of her allotted seat under the earlier counselling.

Defending its decision, the state government told the court that the cancellation was not arbitrary but necessitated by compliance with the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Dr Tanvi Behl case. The government argued that domicile-based reservation in PG medical admissions is unconstitutional, and only limited institutional preference is permissible.

In line with this, the state amended Rule 11 of the 2025 admission rules. Under the revised framework, 50 per cent of PG medical seats are reserved for candidates who completed their MBBS from Chhattisgarh institutions, while the remaining 50 per cent are to be filled strictly on open merit at the national level.

Agreeing with the government, the High Court observed that when admissions are subject to judicial scrutiny and statutory rules, a provisional allotment cannot be treated as a vested right. “After the amendment of Rule 11, no candidate can claim a legal right to continue on a previously allotted seat,” the bench noted.

The court further stated that cancelling the earlier counselling was essential to restore transparency and legality in the admission process. With this verdict, the path is now clear for the state to conduct fresh PG medical counselling strictly under the amended rules.