New Delhi, Aug 4 The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought the Delhi government's stand on doctors' plea seeking immediate initiation of the counselling process for admission to the reserved in-service DNB (post-graduate) seats.
Justice Jasmeet Singh issued a notice on a petition by 14 in-service doctors of various Delhi government hospitals, alleging that despite duly qualifying for NEET-PG 2025, the authorities were yet to initiate the counselling process for admission to post-graduate medical courses under their in-service quota for the 2025 academic year.
The judge asked the Delhi government to file its reply and listed the petition for hearing on August 14.
The petitioners, represented by lawyer Tanvi Dubey, said that since the academic session has already begun, the Delhi government's continued and unexplained inaction put them at risk of losing an entire academic year, which would cause irreparable harm.
The petition asserted that the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS)'s manual for DNB 'Broad Speciality Trainees' provides that 50 per cent of the DNB seats in Broad Speciality disciplines at NBEMS-accredited government hospitals are to be reserved for in-service candidates.
"Respondent No. 1 (Delhi government) has acted arbitrarily and in derogation of its public duty by failing to initiate and conduct the counselling process for admission to the in-service DNB seats for the Academic Session 2025, despite the Petitioners having duly qualified the NEET-PG 2025 examination and despite Respondent No. 1 having consistently conducted such counselling for the previous academic sessions," the petition said.
"The petitioners possess a legitimate expectation, founded on the consistent and unbroken practice followed by Respondent No. 1 in conducting counselling for in-service DNB seats in the Academic Sessions 2023 and 2024, that a similar counselling process would be conducted for the Academic Session 2025 as well,” it added.
“The abrupt and unexplained departure from this settled practice, without prior notice, without assigning any reason, and without affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard, defeats their legitimate expectation and is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution," it asserted.
