Court rules that policy decisions on reservation in MBBS courses fall within executive and legislative domain; no writ of mandamus can be issued without statutory right
In a recent judgment delivered on October 15, 2026, the Allahabad High Court (Division Bench) upheld the dismissal of a writ petition seeking a 1% reservation or special quota for eligible senior citizens in admissions to MBBS and other medical courses through the NEET examination. The petition, filed by Ashok Bahar, requested the court to direct the Union of India and other respondents to consider and take an appropriate policy decision on his representation seeking such reservation.
The court, comprising Justices Rajan Roy and Manjive Shukla, reiterated the principle that the grant of reservation or formulation of admission policies are policy matters that lie within the exclusive domain of the executive or legislature. The petitioner had sought a writ of mandamus-a judicial command directing a public authority to perform a public or statutory duty-but the court found no enforceable legal right of the petitioner or any statutory obligation on the part of the respondents to consider or implement such a reservation.
The judgment emphasized that mere submission of a non-statutory representation does not create a legal right to compel its disposal through judicial intervention. The court noted that the petitioner's representation was essentially a prerequisite step to maintain the writ petition and was not grounded in any statutory provision or mandatory duty enforceable by the court.
The court further observed that the question of whether to prescribe an age limit or grant reservation to senior citizens in medical admissions is a matter for the executive or the legislature. The respondents, including the National Testing Agency which conducts the NEET examination, clarified that they operate under existing laws and policies and have no mandate to create new quotas or reservations without legislative backing.
In dismissing the appeal, the court referred to the Supreme Court's precedent in Census Commissioner v. R. Krishnamurthy (2015) 2 SCC 796, which held that courts should not issue mandamus directing the framing of policies unless there is a statutory duty to do so.
This decision reinforces the judiciary's cautious approach in interfering with policy matters and underscores the separation of powers where legislative and executive branches have the primary role in policy formulation. The petitioner was advised to pursue his demands through appropriate legislative or executive channels.
Bottom Line:
Writ of mandamus cannot be issued to direct the Government to frame or consider framing a policy for providing 1% reservation/special quota for senior citizens in MBBS and other medical admissions through NEET, when no enforceable legal right or corresponding statutory duty is shown; such matters fall within the domain of the executive or legislature.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 226, Constitution of India, 1950
Ashok Bahar v. U.O.I., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2999778
