Nation Current Affairs 30 Apr 2016 Two rounds of NEET & ...

Two rounds of NEET ‘discriminatory’

Published Apr 30, 2016, 6:05 am IST
Updated Apr 30, 2016, 6:05 am IST
Vasudevan, a networking engineer whose daughter aspires to be a doctor, said the SC has not considered the capacity of rural students.
Supreme Court of India (PTI)
 Supreme Court of India (PTI)

Chennai: Medical seat aspirants, their parents and educationists are upset over the Supreme Court approving two rounds of entrance test for admission into medical courses, as they strongly feel it is “discriminatory” in nature and violates the Constitutional guarantee of equal opportunities for all citizens.

The candidates for NEET-1 are clearly at a disadvantage, particularly those who had done their schooling in rural areas and in regional languages, whereas those taking NEET-2 have the option to take their test in the regional languages.


The aspirants say the first round of NEET would allow candidates to appear for the exam either in English or Hindi, but the second round on July 24 would enable them write in their mother tongue.

“This is an injustice to people who have applied for NEET 1st round on May 1. If a student had known that he could write the entrance exam in his own language, he would have opted only for that particular exam. So, NEET-1 is discriminatory and cannot be accepted,” a retired Headmaster of a government school in a village in Tiruvallur district said.

“By creating a disparity between the rural and the urban students, those of the State board and their counterparts from CBSE, those who are to write their exam on May 1 and those applying for phase II, the verdict has gone completely against  Constitution that guarantees equality for all,” Malvika, a student who appears for NEET-1, said.

Vasudevan, a networking engineer whose daughter aspires to be a doctor, said the Supreme Court has not considered the capacity of rural students. “I study in a village in Thiruvarur. How can I compete  with someone who studies in  Thiruvananthapuram. A person who studies in a city has more exposure. Why deny rural students their genuine right?” To make matters worse, students who take NEET-1 would not be allowed to take the second examination.

The legal fraternity is also divided on the issue with P. Wilson, former Additional solicitor-general, terming the judgment “extremely unfair to students”, while K. Subramaniam, former Advocate-General, calling it “doctrine of necessity”.
“Students in the cities will be better prepared than those in rural areas. It is extremely unfair to students and if there is a need to conduct the exam within such short notice, students should at least have been notified on the areas to focus so as to make it easier for them,” Wilson said.

However, Subramanian says the judgment can at best be seen as “doctrine of necessity” since the Supreme Court had less time to decide on the

“This is just an interim order and I hope the court will take a final call and clear the issue soon,” he said. Tamil Nadu has been opposing NEET since it has abolished entrance examinations for undergraduate courses in professional education.