CHENNAI: Madras high court has asserted that, in admissions to medical courses, the court cannot order additional rounds of counselling to fill vacant seats beyond the last date of admission fixed by the Supreme Court. Issuance of any such direction would be violative of the mandate of the Supreme Court, the HC said.The first bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan passed the order while allowing an appeal moved by the Union health ministry challenging a single judge order dated Sept 18, 2025, ordering the conduct of additional counselling to fill vacant seats under NEET Super-Specialty 2024.“We may profitably note that in the case of Ashish Ranjan, the Supreme Court clearly stated that the regulations which laid down the strict timeline schedule for holding counselling in various rounds bear the imprimatur of the apex court. If that is the observation of the SC, we are of the view that, irrespective of whether the seats remain unfilled on account of arbitrary inaction on the part of the officials or not, once the last date of admission was over, the court cannot grant any relief,” the bench said.As rightly pointed out by the additional solicitor general A R L Sundaresan, the apex court, in an umpteen number of judgments, held that the schedule of counselling must be adhered to strictly, the bench said.The court added that if violation of such schedule is permitted and extension of time is granted, it will amount to opening a Pandora’s box, and the whole purpose of fixing a time schedule will be defeated. Extension cannot be granted just because some seats are lying vacant without any other justification.In any case, if any illegality in the process of counselling and admission is found, it could be corrected by the writ court, provided the last date of admission is not over. In those cases where the last date of admission is over, it is fait accompli and, in view of orders passed by the SC in various cases, the party must be left to work out his remedy by approaching the SC, the court added and set aside the order of the single judge.
