NEW DELHI: On Tuesday, the Supreme Court strongly criticized the expansion of the non-resident Indian (NRI) quota in Punjab’s medical colleges, labeling it a “fraud” that unfairly excludes more deserving students from the admission process.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud rejected several petitions challenging a Punjab and Haryana high court decision that had annulled the Punjab government’s move to broaden the NRI quota to include distant relatives of NRIs.
“We need to put an end to this NRI quota practice! It’s outright fraud, and it’s damaging our education system,” the bench, which also included Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, remarked. They stressed that the NRI quota was being misused to bypass merit-based admissions.
The bench criticized the broad interpretation of NRI eligibility, which allowed distant relatives to qualify, calling it a “money-making scheme” that eroded the fairness of the education system.
“All three petitions are dismissed. Let’s close this chapter. This fraud must stop. The NRI quota is nothing but a scam. It ends here. What is a ward? You simply say ‘I’m looking after so-and-so.’ Look at the students with significantly higher scores who lost out. We cannot support something so blatantly illegal,” the bench added.
The court’s sharp criticism followed a Punjab government notification from August 20, which expanded the definition of “NRI candidates” to include relatives like uncles, aunts, grandparents, and cousins. This move was overturned by the Punjab and Haryana high court on September 11, which deemed the expansion “unjustified” and against the original intent of the NRI quota, which was to offer genuine NRIs a chance to study in India.
During the hearing, senior advocate Shadan Farasat argued that a broader interpretation of the NRI quota was already in use in states like Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. However, the Supreme Court dismissed these arguments, reaffirming that expanding the definition undermined merit and allowed less qualified candidates to gain admission through financial influence and connections rather than academic achievement.
Senior advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari, who represented the original petitioner challenging the notification in the high court, noted that the 2005 PA Inamdar judgment by a constitution bench had already disapproved of using the NRI quota as a means for people to buy their way into institutions.
Agreeing with Bhandari, the bench emphasized that the NRI quota should be strictly reserved for genuine NRIs and that merit should not be compromised.
