Ahmedabad: More than a month after directing the authorities to hold an extra round of admissions for three vacant MBBS seats, the Gujarat high court stayed its order upon the National Medical Commission’s (NMC) submitting an application stating that the court’s “order runs contrary to the directions issued by the Supreme Court”.In this case, the HC on Jan 6 directed the National Medical Commission, the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC), and the Admission Committee for Professional Undergraduate Medical Courses (ACPC) to conduct one more round of admissions to fill three MBBS seats that remained vacant. This direction was issued in response to a petition filed by the MEDGUJ Association of Gujarat Medical Colleges.This was the second such petition the association had filed. In Dec 2025, the association first demanded that a stray round be held to fill 57 vacant seats. After this round, three students withdrew from the admission process, and the association filed the second petition. On Jan 6, the HC ordered, “The respondents are directed to go for one more stray vacant round of admission to fill up the remaining three seats of the first year MBBS course. The said exercise is expected to be carried out at the earliest, preferably within a period of 10 days from today.” The admission round took place, and vacancies were filled. This led to vacancies in the Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) course, prompting the association to file another petition.However, a month after the medical seats were filled, the NMC filed a review petition. Its counsel, Vikas Nair, submitted on Monday that the HC passed the Jan 6 order without hearing the NMC, and “therefore, the counsel did not get an opportunity to point out that the said order runs contrary to the directions issued by the Supreme Court”.On hearing this, Justice Desai said, “Accordingly, the order dated Jan 6, 2026, passed in Special Civil Application No. 40 of 2026 shall remain stayed till further orders.” The HC issued a notice to the association, seeking its reply by Feb 23, and stayed its order until then. The ACPC sought exemption from filing a reply, stating it was merely an executing body.
