The Supreme Court on Wednesday, 24 June dismissed a plea challenging the application of Economic Weaker Sections (EWS) reservation in private medical colleges, ruling that EWS status at the time of admission does not automatically entitle candidates to concessional tuition fees. The bench declined to interfere with a Rajasthan High Court judgment that had rejected the challenge brought by a Rajasthan domicile candidate, Harshvardhan Singh.

What the Supreme Court Said

A bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Joymalya Bagchi drew a clear distinction between government and private educational institutions. The bench observed that self-financing private institutions cannot be compelled to charge fees at par with government medical colleges merely because seats are reserved for EWS candidates.

'These are self-financing institutes. For government ones, they get grants from the State. There is a vital difference,' the Justice Nagarathna-led bench stated during the hearing. The court further clarified that while capitation fees remain prohibited, private colleges are not barred from charging regular tuition fees fixed under the applicable regulatory framework.

When the petitioner contended that EWS candidates from families earning under ₹8 lakh annually could not realistically afford tuition fees of ₹18 lakh to ₹25 lakh per year, the bench pointed to existing financial assistance mechanisms. 'If you are unable to pay, get a scholarship,' the bench said.

Background: The Petitioner's Case

Harshvardhan Singh, an EWS candidate who appeared in NEET-UG 2025, had argued that private medical colleges in Rajasthan were charging annual tuition fees between ₹18.90 lakh and ₹25 lakh — far exceeding the ₹8 lakh annual income ceiling set for EWS eligibility. He contended that charging EWS candidates the same fees as general category students defeated the purpose of the 10 per cent reservation introduced through the Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019.

He had sought court directions for affordable fee structures for EWS students in private medical colleges. The special leave petition (SLP) arose from a Rajasthan High Court judgment delivered in May 2025.

What the Rajasthan High Court Had Ruled

A division bench of Justice Arun Monga and Justice Sandeep Shah of the Rajasthan High Court had held in May 2025 that EWS reservation operates only at the stage of admission and does not, in the absence of any statutory provision, create a right to concessional fees in private medical colleges.

The high court noted that the fee structure of private medical colleges in Rajasthan had been fixed by the State Fee Regulatory Committee in accordance with principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka judgment, and that the petitioner had never challenged the underlying fee fixation order itself.

The high court also found that no statutory provision or binding policy in Rajasthan entitled EWS students to fee relaxation, and that a National Medical Commission office memorandum relied upon by the petitioner was merely recommendatory and had not been adopted by the state government. It further noted that all available EWS seats in the concerned college had already been filled during earlier rounds of counselling.

Broader Implications

The ruling underscores a structural tension within India's EWS reservation framework: the income ceiling that defines eligibility is set at ₹8 lakh per annum, yet private medical college fees routinely run to multiples of that figure. Critics argue this gap renders the reservation largely symbolic for students in the private sector.

This comes amid ongoing debate over whether reservation policies — designed primarily for access — should also address the cost of access, particularly in professional courses where private institutions dominate seat availability. The Supreme Court's position, as reiterated on Wednesday, is that these are two separate questions requiring separate legislative or policy action.