The Supreme Court is reviewing a contempt plea concerning Chandigarh’s conversion of UT PG medical seats into the All-India Quota, allegedly violating the landmark Tanvi Behl v. Shrey Goel ruling. Here’s everything you need to know about this critical legal development in NEET-PG 2024 admissions.

Background: The Tanvi Behl v. Shrey Goel Judgment

The controversy stems from the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in the case of Tanvi Behl v. Shrey Goel, where the Court ruled that domicile-based reservations for postgraduate medical admissions violate Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.

This judgment effectively prohibited states and Union Territories like Chandigarh from reserving PG medical seats based on local residency or domicile status.

The Current Dispute: UT Quota Conversion to All-India Quota

Petitioners now claim that Chandigarh officials have violated the Tanvi Behl ruling by converting the remaining Union Territory quota seats into Institutional Preference Pool seats, using NEET-PG 2024 rankings.

They point to a public notice issued on April 9, 2025, complying with the ruling, which was allegedly contradicted by a subsequent notice on June 3, 2025. The latter reclassified these seats as All-India Quota (AIQ), opening them up to nationwide candidates.

Legal Arguments and Courtroom Developments

During a hearing on June 26, 2025, advocate-on-record Jagjit Singh Chhabra stated, “Not even one seat from state quota can be given to All India quota.” This argument was presented before Justices K. V. Viswanathan and N. Kotiswar Singh.

In response, Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave defended the conversion. She argued that since domicile-based quotas are illegal under Tanvi Behl, there was no contempt. However, she acknowledged that the ruling did not clearly define how the vacated 25% State Quota seats should be filled.

Chief Justice May Reassign the Case

Chief Justice of India, B. R. Gavai, is reportedly considering assigning the matter to the original bench that delivered the Tanvi Behl judgment for further clarity and consistency.

Broader Implications for NEET-PG Admissions

This legal challenge raises significant questions about the balance between state discretion and constitutional mandates for equality in the allocation of PG medical seats under the NEET-PG system. The Court’s decision could reshape how quotas are managed nationwide, particularly in Union Territories like Chandigarh.