sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/nrelango_dmk/status/1627106341667082240?t=f9gUiWkywrhQ7SysOB3Cng&s=08 [2/19, 11:39] sekarreporter1: Tamil Nadu government told the Supreme Court that students from State Board schools are at a disadvantage as the NEET is based upon the CBSE/NCERT syllabus
[2/19, 11:39] sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/nrelango_dmk/status/1627106341667082240?t=f9gUiWkywrhQ7SysOB3Cng&s=08
[2/19, 11:39] sekarreporter1: Tamil Nadu government told the Supreme Court that students from State Board schools are at a disadvantage as the NEET is based upon the CBSE/NCERT syllabus. F
T.N. moves SC, says NEET violates basic structure, equality and federalism
The suit says the introduction of the examination has adversely affected the students in the State, in particular students from rural areas and students from State Board-affiliated schools
The Tamil Nadu government on Saturday moved an original suit in the Supreme Court for a declaration that the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) as the sole gateway for entry into medical courses is a violation of the Basic Structure of the Constitution, violation of the fundamental right to equality and an anathema to the principles of federalism.
The suit, filed through advocate Sabarish Subramanian, under Article 131 of the Constitution has arraigned the Union of India as a defendant. It said that the court should declare “the marks obtained in the NEET will be the criterion for admission to medical and allied courses as ultra vires the provisions of the Constitution of India, violative of the basic structure of the Constitution, and are manifestly arbitrary as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.”
It said Tamil Nadu was constrained to approach the top court as the “introduction and continuance of the NEET has adversely affected the students in the State of Tamil Nadu, in particular students from rural areas and students from Tamil Nadu State Board of Education affiliated schools.”
The State also sought a declaration that the apex court judgment in the Christian Medical College, Vellore & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors was not binding on it in so far as it upholds the applicability of NEET for admission to government seats in Tamil Nadu.
The judgment, the State said, had upheld NEET on the ground that it was required to curb the evil of unfair practices – granting admission based on paying capacity of candidates, charging capitation fee, large-scale malpractices, exploitation of students, profiteering, and commercialisation and entrance examinations which are unfair, not transparent and exploitative.
The State said this reasoning did not arise with respect to admissions to government seats. “This reasoning does not apply to government seats and is only applicable to seats in private colleges where evils of capitation fee, exploitation, profiteering etc. exist,” the suit said.
“The introduction of NEET is also violative of the federal structure as it takes away the power of the States to admit students to government seats in medical colleges. Education is a subject that is within the competence of the State to make laws on, and the States have the right to control education for State universities. The introduction of NEET for admission to all medical colleges, irrespective of whether they are private or State government or Central government colleges, is in violation of the federal structure and the autonomy of the States to make decisions regarding education,” the suit argued.
Furthermore, NEET has adversely affected a large number of students of the Plaintiff State who reside in rural areas and study in State Board Schools. These students are at a tremendous disadvantage while appearing for the NEET as it is based upon the CBSE/NCERT syllabus, which is substantially different from the syllabus set by the Tamil Nadu State Board of Education, the State said.
These students were also disadvantaged due to several other factors such as lack of economic resources and access to coaching classes, inability to take a drop year and repeat the examination, it contended. “Therefore, these students, though talented and securing higher marks in their Class XII examinations, are unable to compete on an equal footing with the urban and semi-urban students with more resources,” the suit noted.