Central Idea

• The conflict between Tamil Nadu and the Centre over the National Eligibility and Entrance Test (NEET) has intensified.
• It has reignited discussions about the transfer of education back to the State List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.

Why in news?

• Educational Autonomy: Chief Minister M.K. Stalin called for education’s transfer back to the State List, originally placed in the Concurrent List during the Emergency.
• NEET Controversy: Tamil Nadu’s opposition to NEET escalated dramatically after the tragic suicides of a student and his father due to exam-related stress.

Why Tamil Nadu Opposes NEET?

• Undue competition: NEET, a centralised entrance exam for medical courses, faces opposition in Tamil Nadu due to its mechanical focus on marks.
• Impact on Local Models: NEET disrupted models like Christian Medical College (CMC) Vellore, known for emphasizing aptitude over marks.
• In-Service Quota Impact: NEET dismantled Tamil Nadu’s in-service quota for medical graduates, adversely affecting healthcare quality.
• Disadvantages Marginalized: The exam favours affluent sections who affords lakhs worth coaching (esp. repeaters), disadvantaging underprivileged groups and hindering their aspirations.

Emotive Nature of the Issue

• Equity and Social Justice: Opposition to NEET is deeply rooted in demands for educational equity and autonomy, driven by social justice concerns.
• Kamaraj’s Vision: Tamil Nadu’s education vision, shaped by Chief Minister K. Kamaraj, emphasized accessibility and empathy for unlettered masses.

Legislative Struggles

• AIADMK Bills: The previous AIADMK government introduced Bills in 2017 seeking state autonomy in medical admissions. They were returned by the President.
• Stalin’s Efforts: In 2021, CM M.K. Stalin’s government passed the Tamil Nadu Admission to Undergraduate Medical Degree Courses Bill, 2021, aiming to abolish NEET and base admissions on Class 12 marks for social justice.
• Governor’s Opposition: Governor R.N. Ravi, opposed to the anti-NEET Bill, delayed its forwarding to the President, leading to political tensions.

Justice A.K. Rajan Committee

• Committee Formation: The Justice A.K. Rajan Committee was established in 2021 to assess NEET’s fairness in medical admissions.
• Critical Findings- Rich vs. Poor: The committee criticized NEET for favouring repeaters and coached students while disadvantaging first-time applicants, leading to reduced admissions among marginalized groups.

Why is TN now fuming?

• Concurrent List: Medical course admissions fall under the Concurrent List (Entry 25), allowing states to legislate on these matters.
• Amending Central Laws: States can enact laws related to admissions and amend central laws on admission procedures, as long as they don’t contradict parliamentary laws.

Current Scenario

• Historic Public Health Practices: Tamil Nadu’s public health infrastructure thrived on retaining PG doctors, indicating the state’s effective healthcare practices.
• Balancing Uniformity and Fairness: The NEET stalemate reflects the challenge of balancing uniformity with local values and needs.
• Clash of Values: The conflict highlights the broader tension between central standardization and local autonomy, revealing deeper debates about democracy, equality, and social justice in India.

Conclusion

• The NEET controversy in Tamil Nadu is not merely about an entrance exam; it represents a larger struggle for educational equity, autonomy, and social justice.
• The state’s commitment to its unique vision of education and healthcare clashes with central standardization, sparking a crucial dialogue about the nature of democracy and fairness in the country.

Back2Basics: Seventh Schedule

• The Seventh Schedule under Article 246 of the Indian Constitution is a pivotal component that delineates the allocation of powers between the central government and the states.
• This framework ensures an efficient governance structure by classifying subjects into three lists:

1. Union List: The Union List outlines subjects on which only the Parliament can legislate. This list includes crucial aspects like defense, foreign affairs, currency, communication, and more.
2. State List: The State List enumerates matters solely under the jurisdiction of state legislatures. It encompasses areas such as public health, agriculture, police, local government, and others.
3. Concurrent List: The Concurrent List incorporates subjects on which both Parliament and state legislatures can enact laws. However, in case of a conflict, federal supremacy grants authority to the Parliament’s law.

Evolution and Dynamics

• Over time, the Union List expanded to encompass significant areas such as defense, banking, and foreign affairs.
• The State List’s scope included subjects like public order, police, and agriculture, critical for regional governance.
• The Concurrent List reflects matters of shared importance like criminal law, civil procedure, population control, and more.

Amendments and Special Provisions:

• 42nd Amendment Act (1976): It transferred select subjects like education, forests, and administration of justice from the State List to the Concurrent List.
• 101st Amendment Act (2018): It introduced a special provision for Goods and Services Tax (GST), allowing both Parliament and state legislatures to make laws regarding GST.

Power Distribution and Conflict Resolution:

• Parliament’s jurisdiction prevails over the State List and the Concurrent List in cases of overlap.
• In cases of overlap between the Union List and the State List, the Union List takes precedence.
• If there’s a conflict between the Union List and the Concurrent List, the Union List prevails.
• In situations of conflict between central and state laws on a Concurrent List subject, central law prevails. An exception exists if the state law has the president’s assent.

Consultative Approaches

• Sarkaria Commission (1983) recommended maintaining the existing list allocation, emphasizing the absence of a strong case for transferring items from the Concurrent List to the State List.
• Venkatachaliah Commission (2002) underscored the lack of a formal institution requiring consultation between the Union and states while legislating under the Concurrent List.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now