Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has directed that children of central government employees who were posted outside the State should be recognised as local candidates for MBBS and BDS admissions, in a ruling that could affect the distribution of medical seats for the 2026-27 academic year. The bench disposed of a petition by a NEET-UG 2026 aspirant challenging her exclusion from local status.
Bench, petitioner and legal issue
The order was passed by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin. The petitioner, identified as Kodimela Samhitha, had approached the court after being denied the benefit of being treated as a local candidate by the Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences for MBBS/BDS admissions.
The challenge related to a proviso to Rule 3(a)(iii) of the Telangana Medical and Dental Colleges Admission Rules, 2017, as amended by a government order dated 8 September 2025. The proviso lists four categories of candidates who, despite studying outside Telangana during the qualifying years, may still be counted as local candidates.
Facts of the case
Samhitha’s father was employed with the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC), a central government body, and was transferred from Hyderabad to Tirupati in December 2016. He returned to Hyderabad in May 2024. During the intervening period Samhitha completed her schooling and intermediate education in Andhra Pradesh. Although she holds a nativity certificate indicating her father’s Telangana origin, the university excluded her from local status on the ground that ESIC is a central government corporation and is not covered by the four exempted categories.
Court’s finding and rationale
The bench held that there was no rational basis for denying to children of central government employees a benefit that is already available to children of state government employees. In disposing of the petition, the court observed that the object of the exception is to avoid penalising students who moved out of the State because of their parents’ official transfers.
- Who benefited: Candidates whose parents are central government employees posted outside Telangana during qualifying years.
- Immediate effect: Affected students seeking MBBS/BDS admission for 2026-27 may be entitled to be treated as local candidates.
- Administrative implication: Universities and admission authorities will need to revisit local status determinations for applicants in similar circumstances.
Exemptions under Rule 3(a)(iii)
| Exemption Category | Description |
|---|---|
| Children of state government employees | Official transfers of state employees recognised for local status |
| Children of Telangana-cadre All India Services officers | IAS/IPS officers of Telangana cadre and their transferable postings covered |
| Children of defence and paramilitary personnel | Transfers outside State on official duty accepted |
| Children of employees of state-owned corporations | Employees of state PSUs who are liable to be transferred |
The court’s decision effectively narrows the distinction between central and State transfer cases for the purpose of the admission rule, at least in the context of the facts presented in Samhitha’s petition.
What this means for applicants and admissions authorities
Practically, students who left Telangana because a parent working for a central government body was transferred may now submit claims for local status. Admission authorities, including the Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, will have to consider such applications in light of the High Court’s direction. The ruling could prompt administrative clarifications or further amendments to the rules to set out a clear procedure for assessing transfer-related claims.
Legal experts in Hyderabad noted that the judgment emphasises the purposive construction of statutes and rules — that benefits intended to prevent penalisation of children of transferable employees should not be restricted by technical classifications that defeat the objective.
The case highlights tensions in state admission policies arising from inter-state transfers of government staff and underlines the pressure on admissions regulators to balance regional reservation norms with equitable treatment of candidates displaced by official postings. The full implications for seat allocation and waiting lists for the 2026-27 MBBS/BDS academic session will become clearer as universities act on the court’s direction.
For now, applicants in similar situations may consider approaching the university with transfer records and nativity documentation or seek legal advice to preserve their claim pending any administrative re-determination.
