Supreme Court refuses medical aspirant's plea to change MBBS seat

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea by a candidate for changing her allocation of seat in the NEET-UG 2025 counselling process, stressing that the court would not risk the loss of a valuable medical seat at this advanced stage of admissions.

A bench of Justice P S Narasimha and Justice Atul S Chandurkar said, allowing the student to vacate her MCC allotted seat just to secure a cheaper option could ultimately lead to the wastage of a medical seat for entire academic course, a matter of public interest given the country’s medical education demands.

The court emphasised on preserving the integrity of the admission process and ensuring that valuable medical seats do not remain vacant due to mid-cycle changes. While aspirants continue to navigate unpredictable counselling cycles, the court’s decision sets a clear precedent that financial considerations alone cannot justify disruption to a structured admission schedule

The bench heard Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, for the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC), and advocate Subhash Sagar for the Karnataka Examination Authority (KEA).

The medical aspirant approached the court seeking relief after being denied the opportunity to switch from her existing MCC allotted medical college seat to a provisionally allotted seat under the Karnataka Examinations Authority (KEA). Her plea highlighted the hardships faced by students when sudden policy changes and additional seat are issued after earlier rounds of counselling have concluded.

The petitioner had participated in the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) counselling process for undergraduate medical admissions MBBS.

During the relevant round of counselling, she was allotted a seat at KLE Jagadguru Gangadhar Mahaswamigalu Moorsavirmath Medical College, Hubballi. According to her submissions, she felt compelled to accept the seat owing to the lack of better options at the time. In order to secure the allotment, she also paid a substantial fee of Rs 19.2 lakh as mandated by the institution for confirming the seat.

Subsequently, the KEA issued a fresh notification announcing the 3rd round counselling, which included 450 new seats that had not been part of the 1st and 2nd rounds of counselling.

This sudden addition significantly altered the admission landscape, offering new opportunities to candidates who had already exhausted their choices in MCC rounds. In the 3rd round of counselling under KEA, the petitioner was provisionally allotted a medical seat, carrying an annual fee of approximately Rs 1.66 lakh, a dramatic reduction compared to the college fee she had earlier paid in MCC round.

The petitioner sought the court's nod to surrender her MCC seat and retain the seat allotted by the KEA, arguing that the late introduction of additional seats placed her at a disadvantage and that she should not be penalised for an administrative change.

However, the court refused to grant the relief sought. While acknowledging the petitioner’s financial concerns, the court underscored the larger implications of permitting such changes after admissions have been finalised.