A single-judge bench of Justice K Ravichandrababu had quashed the government's order on July 14 holding that it amounted to discrimination among equals.
In its appeal against the July 14 verdict, the government submitted that the judge ought to have considered that though the National Eligibility cum entrance test (NEET) was common for all students of various boards, more than 50 per cent of the questions were based on CBSE syllabus and it caused an inherent inequality.
"Hence unequals cannot be treated as equals as per the Article 14 of the Constitution," the government said, adding it had no other alternative but to take a policy decision of reservation.
"To ensure equal opportunity to students of various boards, normalisation had been followed till now under the 'Tamil Nadu Admission in Professional Educational Institutions Act, 2006," the government said in its appeal.
This was upheld by a division bench of the high court and it constitutional validity has also been upheld by the Supreme Court, it added.
It submitted that though the Centre has amended the Medical Council of India Act, 1956 and the Dentist Act,1948, for conducting NEET exam, the state government has the powers to enact a separate law.
The appeal also said that two bills passed by the state assembly, seeking exemption from NEET, have not been rejected by the Union government so far.
The single-judge bench ought to have considered that NEET places students from the state board at 'a total disadvantage' vis-?-vis CBSE students, as the syllabus, methodology and state board content and exam pattern are quite different.
Hence the government prayed that the order by the single-judge bench be set aside.?
On a bunch of petitions by some CBSE students challenging the June 22 order of the Tamil Nadu government reserving 85 per cent of MBBS and BDS seats for state board students, Justice K Ravichandrababu had on July 14 held that the impugned reservation was bad in law and violated Article 14 of the Constitution (Equality before law).
"It is an arbitrary exercise of power which is totally unreasonable as under the guise of providing level playing, filed, it makes the equals unequals," the Judge had said.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
