States
Explained | The politics over Jharkhand’s domicile policy
The story so far: The mandatory National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) for admission to undergraduate and postgraduate medical degree courses was introduced across the country based on a Supreme Court ruling in 2016. The Tamil Nadu government vociferously opposed the entrance test from the beginning and initially got exemption from NEET-based admissions. However, in August 2017, the Supreme Court refused to grant further exemption to the State. The legal fight against NEET continues to this day.
The Medical Council of India (MCI) (since replaced by the National Medical Commission) had mooted the NEET in 2009 with a stated objective of ensuring inter-se merit in medical admissions and to avoid multiple entrance tests conducted by different agencies, governments and deemed universities. The following year the MCI had issued a notification to regulate MBBS and BDS admissions in the country through a common entrance test. However, in 2013, by the majority of a 2:1 verdict the Supreme Court had struck down the NEET as unconstitutional and ruled that the MCI had no powers to issue notifications to regulate admissions in medical/dental colleges.
Three years later in April 2016, a five judge bench headed by Justice Anil. R. Dave (who delivered the dissenting verdict in 2013), in a rare order recalled its 2013 judgment and eventually mandated the conduct of NEET. Following requests from certain stakeholders, the Union Government promulgated an ordinance in May 2016 exempting State-run medical colleges from the ambit of the Supreme Court mandate for a year. After which in 2017, the Supreme Court refused to grant exemption from NEET to Tamil Nadu.
No. Other states including Gujarat had also opposed the NEET in the initial years for varying reasons. As reported in The Hindu on May 4, 2016, the Gujarat government had submitted in the Supreme Court that it was “torture” to impose NEET on students who had already mentally prepared for the State entrance exams. Tamil Nadu reiterated its argument that the State does not have a legacy of entrance exams since 2007. States like Jammu and Kashmir [now Union Territory of J&K and Ladakh], Andhra Pradesh and Telangana invoked special provisions in the Constitution to contend that only the State and not the Centre had the legislative competence to conduct examinations for MBBS and BDS courses.
Beyond issues such as the NEET threatening state autonomy, questions have been raised on the pragmatism of the common entrance test score being the sole determinant of merit from Kashmir to Kanniyakumari. The NEET overshadows students’ efforts in their higher secondary education and has known to spawn multi-billion dollar coaching centres. As a result, the focus is more on cracking the ‘be-all-end-all’ examination instead of mastering the subjects at the higher secondary level. It also compromises the learning of non-core subjects. Besides, there have been discrepancies in the conduct of NEET with cases of impersonation being reported. Even in the NEET examination conducted last Sunday, the CBI unearthed an impersonation racket and arrested eight persons. Such racketeering challenges the very concept of merit. Also, while it has ensured merit-based admissions in state-run institutions where the fees is affordable; in deemed universities and private colleges even now students with poor NEET scores, who have the wherewithal to pay hefty sums as fees, continue to edge out meritorious aspirants belonging to poor, lower and middle class families.
After coming to power last year, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam government, constituted a committee headed by retired High Court judge Justice A. K. Rajan to study the effects of the NEET-based admission process. The committee was asked to find whether the entrance test had adversely affected students from the rural and urban poor, those who studied in government schools, those who studied in Tamil medium or any other section of students from Tamil Nadu. If so, the panel was mandated, to suggest the steps to be taken to remove the impediments and to protect the rights of the State, for advancing the principles of social justice and also to fulfil the mandate of the Constitution to provide equal and equitable “access to health” to all sections of the people of Tamil Nadu. Justice Rajan in his report recommended: “The State Government may undertake immediate steps to eliminate NEET from being used in admission to medical programmes at all levels by following the required legal and/or legislative procedures.” He told The Hindu that data showed that 99% of students, who got admitted in medical colleges post-NEET, had gone for coaching. “Coaching focuses only on preparing students to answer questions asked in the particular exam as opposed to learning a subject,” he said.
While most States have adopted NEET, the Tamil Nadu government remains opposed to it with the backing of all major political parties, with the exception of the BJP and one or two fringe outfits. The President refused assent to two Bills adopted by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly unanimously in 2017 seeking exemption from NEET-based admissions for undergraduate and posgraduate degree medical courses.
In 2021, a fresh Bill to admit students for MBBS/BDS courses only on the basis of their class XII board examination scores was adopted by the Legislative Assembly. In February this year, after the Bill was returned by the Governor, for the first time in the history of the state Legislative Assembly, the Bill was readopted by the House and sent back to the Governor. The Raj Bhavan has since forwarded the Bill to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) for Presidential assent. On Tuesday, the Minister of State for Home Affairs Ajay Mishra informed the Lok Sabha that clarification has been sought from the Tamil Nadu Government on the Bill seeking to dispense with the NEET. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the Ministry of AYUSH had furnished comments on the Bill which have been shared with the state government of Tamil Nadu for their comments and clarifications.
