Mumbai: To the great relief
of 93 students enrolled in the Bachelor of Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery
(BHMS) programmes across various institutions in Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court has upheld the legality of their admissions after 10 years of completion
of course. The court noted that homeopathic colleges were exempt from adhering to
the NEET-UG admission procedure beyond the first round of seat allotments.The core dispute between the parties is that the Petitioner Association of Management of Homoeopathic Medical Colleges of Maharashtra and its member colleges were seeking to regularise admissions given to 93 students who were admitted during the academic years 2013-14 and 2014-15. This happened because the earlier existing practice of permitting the private Homeopathy colleges to fill in vacant seats on the basis of eligibility criteria issued by the Central Council for Homeopathy (CCH) was not followed. It was a time when NEET-UG was introduced in 2013.Also Read:Manipal Hospitals Pune gets show-cause notice for holding body over unpaid billThe petitioners in the
case included an association representing homeopathic colleges across the
state, along with four individual institutions. Their argument centred on the
autonomy of member colleges to admit students of their choosing, provided the criteria
outlined by the Central Council of Homoeopathy (CCH) were met. This includes
passing the Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC) examination with subjects in
Physics, Chemistry, and Biology (PCB), and satisfying the required age limit.

According to the
association, once students are admitted based on merit through either the
state-level Common Entrance Test (CET) or NEET-UG, any remaining vacancies
should be allowed to be filled by candidates who meet the minimum
qualifications prescribed by the CCH. The association also highlighted that the
Supreme Court has previously recognized their right to conduct their own
entrance examinations for such admissions.

It was further mentioned
that the rules framed by the State for conducting CET for admission to health
sciences courses are provided under Rule 4.10 for admission to BHMS colleges.
It does not mandate the students to secure any specific marks for being
eligible for admission to member colleges. The said rule simply mentions that a
candidate will be selected on the basis of merit in CET. Thus, CET is only a
criterion for deciding inter-se merit and not an eligibility for admission. In any case, CCH is the highest statutory body in the field, and it
does not prescribe admission through CET only, but simply provides that admission
should be affected on the basis of HSC marks. Under the Rules, the State Government can
conduct only the first round of admission, and vacant seats thereafter were allowed
to be filled by the Association or colleges for many years, from 2007 till the academic year 2012-13.

For AY 2013-14, the State
of Maharashtra conducted NEET-UG in routine course and forwarded a select list of
the candidates after the first round of admission process to the member colleges,
who were admitted. However, since seats remained vacant, the Petitioner
Association issued an advertisement and requested the candidates who appeared in
CET to apply for vacant seats. However, even then, 58 seats remained vacant in
various member colleges. The Association, following its usual
practice since 2005, applied multiple times to the Samiti (Admissions Regulation Committee constituted after the directions of the Supreme Court called Pravesh Niyantran Samiti, is referred to as ‘the Samiti’) for permission to
fill these seats with students who had passed HSC with PCB subjects, as per CCH
norms. Despite their efforts, including requesting an extension of the
admission deadline (granted until 30.11.2013), the Samiti failed to respond or
grant permission, later stating it lacked jurisdiction. Consequently, the
Association admitted eligible HSC students on merit and filed a writ petition
after MUHS refused to grant eligibility, stating admissions must be via CET.

The Association
challenged this decision in court. The
Aurangabad Bench transferred the petition regarding BHMS admissions to the
principal seat of the Bombay High Court to be heard with a similar ongoing
case. Meanwhile, the Petitioner Association and its member colleges filled
vacant seats with HSC (PCB) qualified candidates on merit, pending court
approval. However, MUHS denied eligibility on 05.12.2013, citing the lack of
DMER sanction and insisting that admissions must be through CET.

For 2014–15, the
Association again filled seats after the CET/NEET-UG first round through local
advertisements, but some seats still remained vacant. When these admissions
were sent for approval, MUHS and the Samiti raised objections. As a result,
multiple petitions were filed for the affected students. Several interim
applications, including requests for results, certificates, and internships,
remain pending in court.Also Read:Doctors Willing to Pay Penalty Cannot be Compelled to Undergo Bond Service: HCAfter considering the
submissions, the court observed, “Clause 4.10 of the said brochure provided that
for the BHMS college, candidates will be selected on the basis of merit in NEET
UG-2013. This clause is interpreted by the Respondent Samiti to mean that no
student can be selected for BHMS outside of NEET-UG-2013 process. But this
stand simply overlooks Clause 9.2.6 which provided that as per directives of
the High Court, Mumbai in Review Petition No. 8634 of 2007 in Writ Petition No.
6332 of 2005 only one round of private Homeopathic Medical College will be
carried out during first round of admission of 85% seats of the total intake
capacity. This clause is important as the brochure itself recognises that only
one round of private Homeopathic Colleges will be carried out during the first
round of admission.”Clause 10.6 of the said brochure provided that seats that have arisen or fallen
vacant after first round shall be made available at the second round of selection
(except Homeopathic Colleges) on the basis of preference from already submitted.
This clause makes it abundantly clear that an exception was carved out for
Homeopathic Colleges and vacant seats after the first round for Homeopathic
Colleges will not go WP-7248-2014 group (J) C4.doc back to the process under NEET
UG-2013 and its insistence by both Respondent the Samiti and Respondent MUHS is
unfounded and deserves to be rejected.The court further noted, “So far as admissions in AY 2014-15 is concerned, perusal of applicable MH-CET-2014 Brochure
indicates that Clauses 4.5.1.1, 4.5.1.3 and 4.10 are identical. However, the remaining Clauses 9.2.6
and 10.6 are apparently absent. Even if it is so, in our opinion, since the concerned students from
Writ Petition Nos.8128 of 2015, 8129 of 2015, 8130 of 2015 and 8233 of 2015 are concerned, who
were admitted AY 2014-15, have been protected under the orders of the Court. Therefore only for
these students, we are inclined to hold that they were eligible because the relevant eligibility under
Clause 4.10 does WP-7248-2014 group (J) C4.doc not provide that the candidates be selected only
on the basis of merit in MH- CET-2014. It is nobody’s case that the concerned students are not
eligible as per CCH requirement (12th Standard/HSC pass with PCB marks). The students in these 4
writ petitions are protected by the orders dated 17.06.2016 passed in Civil Application Nos.1038 of
2016, 1039 of 2016, 1036 of 2016 & 1037 of 2016 and order dated 10.06.2019 passed in Civil
Application Nos.1126 of 2019 & 1128 of 2019 and order dated 29.09.2021 passed in Interim
Application No.2526 of 2021.”

“We reiterate that the
concerned students have already been protected by the interim orders of this
Court, under which they have been permitted to appear for examination, their
results have been declared, and they have already passed the homeopathy course.
After a period of about 10 years or more, concerned students of the Petitioner
Colleges must get a closure and clarity about the cloud hanging over their
eligibility,” the bench further added. The court has also instructed MUHS to
issue or release all pending marksheets / degrees / other certifying documents
and/or original documents of the concerned 93 students (whichever applicable, depending on completion of the course), if not already issued/released, within a
period of four weeks. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and for the reasons recorded above, the Petitions
succeed and following order is passed :
(A) The impugned communications dated 05/12/2013 issued by the Respondent No.
4-MUHS, dated 11/12/2014 issued by the Respondent
– MUHS, dated 27/03/2015 issued by Respondent-the Samiti and impugned decision
dated 10/02/2015 by the Respondent-the Samiti, in respect of the concerned 93
students on whose behalf the Petitions were filed, are quashed and set aside.
(B) It is held that all the concerned 93 students, as admitted by the Petitioner
colleges, were eligible to be admitted.
(C) The Respondent No. 4-MUHS is directed to issue/release all pending marksheets
/ degrees / other certifying documents and/or original documents of the concerned
93 students (whichever applicable depending on completion of course), if not already
issued/released, within a period of four weeks from today.
(D) Such of the concerned students who have left the BHMS course mid-way
unfinished will not be entitled to seek its continuation on the basis of this judgment.To view the order, click on the link below:https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/associationofmanagementofvsthestateofmaharashtrathroughitson6may2025-286008.pdf