The Bombay High Court has invalidated the Goa government’s initiative to implement a sports quota for admissions to medical and dental colleges after the admission process had already commenced, ruling that it contravened the established regulations outlined in the admission prospectus.
A division bench comprising Justices Bharati H Dangre and Nivedita P Mehta issued the ruling in response to a petition submitted by a NEET candidate who contested a notice released on August 1 by the Directorate of Technical Education (DTE), which invited athletes to apply for unfilled seats under the Children of Freedom Fighters (CFF) category.
A copy of the ruling dated August 25 was made public on Tuesday. The bench noted that the common admission prospectus for the academic year 2025-26 “holds the force of law and is obligatory for both the authorities and the candidates,” stressing that adherence to timelines is crucial in the admission process.
“Inviting applications under a new category after the counselling process has commenced, without amending the prospectus or notifying any changes, constitutes altering the rules of the game mid-play,” the court stated. The prospectus included 180 seats for the MBBS program at Goa Medical College, Bambolim, and 50 seats for a five-year BDS program at the Goa Dental College.
Senior advocate S S Kantak, representing the petitioner, contended that the DTE had released a counselling schedule for MBBS admissions on July 28, which indicated that the first round of counselling was to take place on August 1, but it was postponed to August 5.
The petitioner took part in the first round of counselling for MBBS/BDS on August 5, and by the conclusion of this round, the candidate ranked 78 had secured the last available seat in MBBS in the general category, while the candidate ranked 108 obtained the first seat in BDS in the general category, as reported.
Only two candidates ranked above the petitioner, who did not gain admission, which led him to believe he still had a chance to secure a seat in either MBBS or BDS in the general category. Nevertheless, the establishment of a new sports quota dashed his aspirations.
“The government allowed qualified individuals of merit to submit an application for the first time under the sports quota by setting the cut-off date as August 14,” the petition indicated. Kantak contended that the state government’s action, following the release of the ranking in the merit list and the predetermined date for the initial counselling session, constituted a modification of the rules after the commencement of the process.
The government, represented by Advocate General Devidas Pangam, defended the initiative, referencing its executive authority and the Goa Sports Policy of 2009.
Sports organizations, including the Goa Football Association and the Fencing Association, intervened in favor of the quota, asserting that numerous states had already implemented comparable initiatives.
The bench, in its ruling, noted that cut-off dates were established for submitting applications, and the merit list was published on July 30 by applying the criteria outlined in the Rules. “If the sports quota reservation had been previously indicated in the prospectus, we must clarify that we would not have intervened, as it was the prerogative of the state authority to decide in whose favor the reservation would be allocated, or if a candidate from a specific category was unavailable, to which category the seat would be assigned,” the ruling stated.
While emphasizing that the state is entitled to formulate policies to promote sports, the bench underscored that such initiatives must be integrated prior to the commencement of the admission process.
“The court observed that implementing the quota following the release of the merit list and amidst the ongoing counselling negatively affects the fairness and transparency of the admission process.”
