Eligibility criteria under scrutiny
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has set aside the cancellation of a doctor’s candidature for admission to the DM Critical Care Medicine course at AIIMS, holding that the mandatory three-year postgraduate residency can be counted cumulatively even if completed across more than one institution.
Prospectus does not mandate single institute
The court ruled that the INI-SS prospectus requires completion of 1,095 days of training and does not stipulate that the residency must be undertaken in a single institution. On this basis, the court directed AIIMS to restore the doctor’s candidature.
Court disallows new conditions at final stage
Justice Jasmeet Singh observed that AIIMS could not introduce an additional eligibility condition at the final stage of admission when the governing prospectus was silent on such a requirement, terming the rejection legally unsustainable.
Background of the case
The High Court was hearing a plea filed by Dr Shah, who secured All India Rank 4 in the INI-SS January 2026 examination. His candidature was cancelled by AIIMS through a letter dated January 2, citing fragmented residency experience.
Residency completed across institutions
The petitioner had completed his MD (Anaesthesiology) residency across three NMC-recognised institutions due to counselling reshuffles during the Covid-19 pandemic. His total training exceeded 1,095 days and was duly certified by Gujarat University.
Court rejects AIIMS’ interpretation
Rejecting AIIMS’ stand, the court held that eligibility conditions must be “clear, explicit and uniformly applicable” and cannot be supplemented by later interpretations. It noted that Clause 4.3.2 of the prospectus only mandates three years’ tenure by the cut-off date and is silent on the requirement of a single institution.
Objection raised at last stage criticised
The court also recorded that AIIMS had accepted the doctor’s application, issued an admit card, allowed him to participate in counselling and declared him successful before raising objections at the final stage. Such action, it said, undermines merit and fails judicial scrutiny.
Relief granted to petitioner
Holding that denial of admission would result in a “travesty to merit”, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the rejection letter. It ruled that the petitioner’s fragmented residency, totalling 1,095 days in the same discipline, fulfilled the eligibility criteria and ordered restoration of his candidature.
