Punjab and Haryana High Court Rebukes NBEMS for Arbitrary Practices and Imposes Fine

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has criticized the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) and other educational institutions for engaging in arbitrary, irrational, and discriminatory practices detrimental to students. The Division Bench, consisting of Justice Sandeep Moudgil and Justice Deepak Gupta, also imposed an exemplary cost of Rs 25,000 on NBEMS to be paid to a petitioner whose candidature as an NBEMS trainee was unjustly canceled.

Case Background:

• Petitioner’s Issue: The petitioner’s candidature was canceled due to the non-submission of a self-appraisal report, a requirement introduced post-admission.
• Admission Process: Completed by December 31, 2023, with all documents verified.
• New Requirement: NBEMS sought self-appraisal reports from the petitioner and other candidates on February 8, post-completion of the admission process.

Court’s Observations and Decision:

1. Quashing the Order:
   • The High Court quashed the NBEMS order, emphasizing that the requirement for a self-appraisal report was introduced without prior notification and after the completion of the admission process.
2. Arbitrariness and Lack of Competency:
   • The Bench stated that the eligibility criteria in the NBEMS information bulletin did not mention a self-appraisal report. Therefore, introducing this requirement after the admissions were finalized was beyond the board’s competency and authority.
3. Principle of Non-Arbitrariness:
   • The court stressed that state actions must not be arbitrary but should be based on rational, non-discriminatory, and relevant principles. Actions influenced by extraneous or arbitrary considerations amount to a denial of equality.
4. Reasonableness and Rationality:
   • The principle of reasonableness and rationality is integral to ensuring equality and non-arbitrariness under Article 14 of the Constitution. This principle must characterize every state action, whether under the authority of law or in the exercise of executive power without making law.
5. Adherence to Guidelines:
   • The state or its instrumentalities cannot deviate from established guidelines and conditions in admission brochures. Arbitrary actions during public appointments, contractual relationships, or admissions processes violate these guidelines.

Court’s Ruling:

• Penalty Imposed: NBEMS was fined Rs 25,000 to be paid to the petitioner.
• Rationale: The court highlighted that NBEMS’s post-admission introduction of the self-appraisal report requirement was arbitrary and discriminatory, lacking a basis in the initial eligibility criteria.

This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to established guidelines and procedures in educational admissions, ensuring fairness and non-discrimination in state actions.

For detailed updates on legal and educational issues, visit Kanishk Social Media. If you found this article informative, please share it with others interested in legal and educational justice developments.