JODHPUR, April 15 -- The Rajasthan High Court ruled on Monday that reservation benefits granted in one state cannot extend to another, directing out-of-state reserved-category candidates to compete for MBBS postgraduate seats in Rajasthan under the unreserved category for the 2025-2026 academic year. A single bench led by justice Sanjeet Purohit made the observation while dismissing a petition from the Federation of Private Medical and Dental Colleges of Rajasthan. The petition challenged a February 18, 2026, decision that treated candidates from reserved categories in other states as general-category contenders, denying them the lower percentile cutoff for reserved seats. Petitioners argued that a Central Government notification mandated uniform eligibility percentages across all counselling boards, allowing out-of-state reserved-category candidates to participate on the same terms. The bench clarified that reservations are state-specific. It noted: "The statutory scheme of the Rajasthan Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes, Special Backward Classes & Economically Backward Classes (Reservation of Seats in Educational Institutions in the State and of Appointments & Posts in Services under the State) Act, 2008, as well as the provisions of the Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023, makes it evident that castes, races and tribes are classified as SCs, STs, BCs, SBCs or OBCs in relation to each individual state. Such classification and notification are based on the unique socio-economic and cultural realities of that specific region, and the corresponding policy decisions governing reservation are necessarily informed by these state-specific considerations." The court rejected claims that the decision created a 100% domicile-based reservation regime. It explained that the order does not bar out-of-state candidates outright but withholds reserved-category perks for them, limiting those benefits to Rajasthan natives. "This Court is also not persuaded to accept the contention advanced by counsel for the petitioner that the impugned decision results in a regime of 100% domicile-based reservation," the bench said. "In substance, the decision dated February 18, 2026, does not create an absolute bar based on domicile; rather, it stipulates that the benefit of revised qualifying marks prescribed for reserved categories shall not be extended to candidates belonging to reserved categories of other states. Effectively, the decision operates to withhold reservation benefits from out-of-state reserved category candidates and confines such benefits to reserved category candidates of the State of Rajasthan. Such a classification is legally permissible and does not offend the constitutional mandate." The bench added that such candidates remain eligible for unreserved seats if they meet general-category criteria....