New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has struck down the blanket prohibition on migration of MBBS students under the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023, holding that such a complete ban is manifestly arbitrary and violative of constitutional protections.
The Court directed the authorities to reconsider the transfer request of a visually impaired medical student seeking to migrate from a Rajasthan medical college to Delhi on medical and disability-related grounds.
A Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice and Justice Tejas Karia ruled that Regulation 18 of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023, which imposed a total ban on migration of undergraduate medical students, cannot be sustained in law.
The Court held that a blanket prohibition, even in exceptional or deserving cases, violates Article 14 of the Constitution and fails to account for the rights of persons with disabilities.
The Bench further directed the National Medical Commission (NMC) to reconsider the petitioner’s migration request without relying on the impugned prohibition and to examine his case in light of disability rights and the need for reasonable accommodation.
The petitioner, Sahil Arsh, who suffers from 40 per cent visual impairment, cleared NEET-UG 2023 under the Other Backwards Class-Persons with Disabilities category.
However, he was initially denied participation in counselling under the PwD category, compelling him to approach the Supreme Court, which subsequently directed authorities to treat him as a PwD candidate.
By the time he was allowed to participate in counselling, only the stray vacancy round remained, leaving him with limited options. He eventually secured admission at Government Medical College, Barmer, Rajasthan. The petitioner later sought migration to Delhi, citing deterioration of his eye condition due to the harsh climate in Barmer and the need for treatment at AIIMS Delhi.
His request was rejected by the NMC in December 2024 on the grounds that the 2023 Regulations had removed the migration provision entirely.
The High Court observed that while maintaining uniform standards in medical education is a legitimate objective, imposing a total prohibition on migration ignores real-life contingencies and disproportionately affects deserving students.
The Court emphasised that the possibility of misuse cannot justify the denial of legitimate rights, particularly when reasonable safeguards can be adopted.
The Bench also noted that the petitioner’s situation arose largely due to the counselling authorities’ failure to recognise his PwD status in time, which deprived him of the opportunity to choose a suitable medical college earlier. Holding him responsible for selecting a distant college under such circumstances was found to be unreasonable.
Relying on provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, the Court reiterated that authorities are duty-bound to provide reasonable accommodation and ensure equality and non-discrimination. It held that denying admission to a student whose medical condition had worsened due to environmental factors constitutes a denial of such accommodation.
The Court further underscored that regulatory measures may not disregard human dignity or constitutional protections in pursuit of administrative efficiency.
