Christian Medical College Vellore Association v. Union of India 

Court: Supreme Court of India

Petitioner: Christian Medical College Vellore Association 

Respondent: Union of India and Others

Bench: M.R. Shah, Vineet Saran, Arun Mishra

Date of Judgement: 29 April, 2020

Important Sections/Articles-Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 19(1)(g), 25,26,29(1) and 30


In this case, the constitutionality of the announcements that established NEET as the standard test for graduate and postgraduate admissions in all medical and dental educational institutions was at issue. The MCI and DCI released a number of notifications to prescribe the administration of NEET exams and to revise the Central statutes governing higher education in the medical and dental sciences. Additionally, the Notifications included some provisions that lowered the requirements for candidates from Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes and candidates with physical disabilities to be admitted. All Indian medical and dental schools, including those serving underprivileged minorities and those that do not, were included by this announcement.

Afterwards, a few minority-affiliated educational institutions filed appeals, special leave applications, and civil cases in front of several courts that had the necessary jurisdiction.These educational establishments contended that the notices curtailed their freedom to apply their current admissions procedure and their capacity to educate students from linguistic and religious minority groups. Therefore, they claimed, the notifications’ requirements violated the Constitution’s Articles 19(1)(g) (right to practice a profession) and 30 (right of minorities to create and manage educational institutions). As a result, the minority institutions asked the Court to invalidate the Notices.

A three-judge bench of the court was assigned to hear the numerous transferred civil cases, appeals, and writ petitions that had been filed before several courts.


Whether the use of NEET as the uniform qualifying admissions examination for the MBBS, PG, BDS and MDS degree programs violated the constitutional rights of minority institutions, and restricted their autonomy to admit students of their choice.



That the notifications in question violate the fundamental rights of an unsupported minority institution, as guaranteed by Article 30 of the Indian Constitution in conjunction with Articles 25 and 26, to establish and manage educational institutions of its choosing, including the right to admit students of its choosing. India is defined by the liberty and autonomy of its citizens, according to the theory of limited government, which places an intrinsic restraint on the state’s involvement in matters pertaining to student admissions. By failing to provide other viable solutions, the NEET impedes an unsupported minority institution’s ability to create and run an educational institution of its own choosing. that the government lacks the authority to compel admission via a national entrance exam like NEET. The minority institution’s fundamental right to admit students under Article 30 would be violated by such an imposition.


That the unsupported minority institutions do not lose their basic rights as a result of the contested reforms. The disputed law was introduced in an attempt to reduce the nation’s medical institutes’ pervasive corruption and dearth of regulation. In the later-used case of Christian Medical College Vellore v. Union of India, this court primarily argued that the 1956 Act and MCI did not authorize the administration of the NEET and that a uniform common entrance examination could not be introduced by subsidiary legislation. Nevertheless, both restrictions were lifted with the advent of Section 10D, making NEET lawfully permissible. However, after the introduction of Section 10D, both limitations were removed, making NEET constitutionally valid. 


By the judgment of this case, C.M.C. v. The Government of India, the Court has stated that the national interest takes precedence over the fundamental rights to establish educational institutions for minorities. In a crucial ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) would be introduced into the private unsupported minority colleges to screen candidates for MBBS, MD B.D.S. and MDS courses. The court also reiterated the principles of protection of minority educational institutions under Article 30 of the Indian Constitution. It said there was no violation of fundamental rights. In a 108-long judgment, the court maintained certain points that the petitioners contested during their arguments. According to the petitioner, the NEET announcement violated the fundamental rights of the institution of an unsupported minority that protects the Indian Constitution under Article 30.  


The Central Government, the Medical Council of India, and the Dental Council of India have all adhered to the nation’s medical colleges’ organized admissions procedure. They made the revolutionary decision to administer entrance examinations everywhere, including in historically underrepresented educational institutions. As we can see, the NEET exam satisfies students’ aspirations to become involved in the medical science field. As soon as the candidate’s NEET score indicates that they are qualified, this wish becomes simple. The candidate may select any location in the nation if the exam results indicate that he is qualified. If the individual is willing to relocate, they are offered the chance to pursue medical study. With this system, every citizen will have fair access to opportunities. And does not violate any provision mentioned in the Constitution.