NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday condemned the expansion of the non-resident Indian (NRI) quota in Punjab’s medical schools, calling it a “fraud” that forces extra meritorious college students out of the admission course of.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud dismissed a set of petitions difficult a Punjab and Haryana high court order that quashed the Punjab authorities’s transfer to broaden the NRI quota standards, together with distant family members of NRIs.
“We must stop this NRI quota business now! This is complete fraud, and this is what we are doing to our education system,” remarked the bench, which included Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, emphasising that the NRI quota was being exploited to sidestep merit-based admissions.
The bench stated a broad interpretation of NRI eligibility, which even allowed distant family members to qualify, amounted to a “money-spinning tactic” that undermines the integrity of the education system.
“All three petitions are dismissed. Let us put a lid on this. This fraud has to come to an end. This NRI business is nothing but a fraud. This comes to an end now. What is ward? You just have to say ‘I am looking after X’. See the students who got three times high scores have lost out. We cannot lend our authority to something which is blatantly illegal,” noticed the bench.
The prime courtroom’s stern feedback got here in opposition to the backdrop of a Punjab authorities notification issued on August 20, which redefined “NRI candidates” to incorporate family members reminiscent of uncles, aunts, grandparents and cousins. This expansion was quashed by the Punjab and Haryana excessive courtroom on September 11, which discovered the transfer “unjustified” and opposite to the unique function of the NRI quota — meant to offer real NRIs a chance to check in India.
During the listening to, senior advocate Shadan Farasat argued that the broader interpretation of the NRI quota was already getting used in different states, together with Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. However, the Supreme Court firmly rejected these arguments, reiterating that the broader definition diluted benefit and allowed much less deserving candidates to achieve admission primarily based on monetary energy and connections quite than educational efficiency.
Senior advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari, representing the unique petitioner who challenged the notification earlier than the excessive courtroom, identified {that a} structure bench in the PA Inamdar judgment (2005) frowned upon the truth that the NRI quota can’t be misused to pave the best way for the individuals to make use of cash energy to get in.
Agreeing with Bhandari, the bench underscored that NRI quotas ought to solely be reserved for real NRIs and that benefit shouldn’t be sidelined.
