HC Upholds Exclusion of Central Govt Employees’ Children from Local Quota

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court upheld the exclusion of children of Central Government employees and Central Government Corporation employees from the relaxation granted under the rules governing local candidature for MBBS and BDS admissions, ruling that such classification was neither arbitrary nor unconstitutional. The bench comprising Acting Chief Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda observed that individual hardship, however compelling, could not be a ground to strike down a valid rule.

The bench was dealing with a writ petition filed by Lakshmi Pavan Rahul Gulumuru, challenging government order dated September 8, 2025, insofar as it excluded children of Central Government employees and employees of Central Government Corporations from the benefit of local candidature. The petitioner contended that his father, an employee of the State Bank of India, was posted outside Telangana, including at its New York branch, requiring him to pursue his education outside the State. Despite securing 456 marks in NEET-UG 2026, the petitioner was denied local candidate status for admission into MBBS and BDS courses for the academic year 2026-27. 

Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the exclusion was arbitrary and discriminatory, as children of State Government employees, Telangana cadre All India Services officers, defence personnel and employees of State Government corporations were extended the benefit. Opposing the plea, Advocate General contended that the determination of local candidature was a matter of State policy and that the classification was neither arbitrary nor unconstitutional.

The panel observed that the State was empowered to prescribe eligibility criteria for local candidates and that the exclusion of children of Central Government employees and banking corporation employees did not violate Articles of the Constitution.

The panel pointed out that the Supreme Court upheld the amended admission rules and that the High Court could not enlarge the categories recognised by the apex court. While acknowledging the hardship faced by the petitioner, the bench observed that courts could examine the constitutional validity of a rule but could not rewrite it to accommodate individual circumstances and dismissed the writ petition.

- L Ravichander