TN committee to study NEET impact does not defy Supreme Court or challenge Union's authority: Madras High Court rejects BJP leader's challenge

The Madras High Court on Tuesday dismissed the petition challenging the Tamil Nadu government's constitution of a nine-member committee to study the impact of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) for medical admissions on socially backward students (K Nagarajan v. Union of India and ors)..The petition moved by General Secretary of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Tamil Nadu, Karu Nagarajan had contended that the formation of the committee runs contrary to Supreme Court rulings and that it was unconstitutional illegal, unfair and without legal justification..However, the High Court disagreed, holding that the setting up of the committee does not amount to subverting the process of medical admissions and is not an act of defiance to any order passed of the Supreme Court or even the remotest challenge to the authority of the Union government. ."How does the notification run contrary to the Supreme Court? They are not interfering with admission. They have set up a commission, it will act on terms of reference and submit a report … It does not touch on the Supreme Court order," the Court orally observed when arguments commenced on Tuesday. .Appearing for the petitioner, advocate V Raghavachari responded that it is not as if the Supreme Court passed its judgment favoring mandatory conduct of NEET without factoring in various concerns. In this regard, he also pointed out that a parliamentary committee had been set up to study the matter before the top court gave its judgment..The Court, however, continued to express doubts as to whether the committee's constitution itself can be struck down. ."If government wants a report to build up public opinion, to tell the Union ‘this is the harm cause’, an empirical study is conducted - why do we need to stop it? As long as government does not infringe upon exclusive domain of Section 14 (of the National Medical Commission Act), why should we interfere?", the Court asked. .While advocate Raghavachari recounted that the High Court itself had expressed concern earlier whether the committee can be constituted without the Supreme Court's leave, the Court responded by questioning whether a stray oral observation can be made the basis of the petitioner's case. ."You obtain leave of Supreme Court, else this should stop:" Madras High Court on Tamil Nadu decision to assess NEET impact on socially deprived.The Court proceeded to express its disinclination to take up the matter further, orally observing that the case has attracted enough publicity and media attention. .Highlights of the Order.In the order, the Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy concluded that setting up of the committee itself can "by no stretch of imagination" be seen as contrary to any Supreme Court order, whether in letter or spirit. ."For all we know, the commission may come up with some material that the State government may used to persuade the Union or any other that the government may seek to pursue to modify the process or make it more inclusive for students belonging to the economically (or socially) weaker sections to participate in the process," the Court added..The Bench added that an alternate point of view is also equally possible that the way forward for students of the State to compete favourably with others in NEET may be to raise the standard of school education..However, this is a question of policy in which the Court cannot rush to interfere, the Bench concluded. ."It is a question of policy as to whether the bar has to be raised at the school level or the bar has to be lowered at medical admission level and such matters of policy are resolved by discussion and discussion begins with the other point of view.".While some citizens may feel that it is a waste of resources to spend funds on the constitution and maintenance of such a committee or that the costs incurred are better spent on COVID-19 relief, these are choices that an elected government has to take and "indeed, in the Constitutional scheme, has the freedom to take", the Court added. ."Courts cannot rush in and interdict notifications or steps taken pertaining to policy or garnering public opinion or the like", the order stated..The Bench added that the Court would have been called to immediately interfere if: - the issuance of the notification constituting the committee was in any manner perceived to be an affront to the authority of the Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution;- the issuance of the notification constituting the committee was in derogation of the obligation of the State to aid the implementation of an Supreme Court order under Article 144;- the issuance of the notification constituting the committee was against the national procedure for entrance exam which was laid down following a Parliamentary legislation in a field open to the parliament only..However, since nothing of the kind can be apprehended or reasonably seen in this case, the Court concluded that there is no need to interfere in the State government's decision to constitute the panel..The Court also found no merit in the submissions made by Additional Solicitor General R Sankaranarayanan for the Central government, wherein he had cited Articles 162, 245, 254 and 256 of the constitution.."The issuance of the notification has nothing to do with the provisions of the Constitution cited", the Bench opined. .Tamil Nadu govt Committee to study NEET impact a slight against Supreme Court, an exercise in futility: Central govt to Madras High Court.The Court, therefore, dismissed the petition, observing that the issuance of the notification constituting the NEET impact study committee does not exceed the authority of the State, as long as the State government does not do anything to upset the procedure for admission to medical institutions as established by law..Whereas further submissions had been sought to be made by various political parties and others who had moved impleadment applications, the Court made note to record that it has only heard the petitioner and the Central government before dismissing the plea. ."Both of you get boxing gloves:" Madras High Court agrees to hear all seeking to be impleaded in challenge to TN Committee studying NEET impact."None has been called upon, not even the State … and it is not the business of the Court to play to the galleries, indulging in discussions which is beyond the scope of lis or to widen the malady sought to be arrested by the lis", the Court said today..Among others, senior advocates P Wilson and S Prabakaran appeared for those who had moved impleading applications. .[Read Order]