The legal argument against NEET and Supreme Court’s Highhandedness

This entry is part 4 of 13 in the series Tamil Nadu Opposes NEET

This is the 4th part of “Why Tamil Nadu Opposes NEET” a series of posts on Anitha’s suicide and NEET. It is based on a speech by Mr. Marudhaiyan of People’s Arts and Literature Association (PALA), published in  The text of the speech has been translated into English by Nesan. Those who know Tamil can view the videos of speech here.

We publish this in 12 parts with suitable explanatory comments for the benefit those from outside Tamil Nadu.

Please read and share your views. Please also spread this message to your friends circles widely.

When Supreme Court declared it was clear that NEET was inevitable, on behalf of the students of state board syllabus a case was filed before Madurai high court.

“We studied in state board syllabus. All of a sudden, if we are given question paper based on CBSE syllabus, how can we manage?” That was their case. There are students like Anitha with 1176, 1180, etc. They questioned, are their marks meaningless, invalid, will they be rejected?

The Madurai high court accepted these two questions as legitimate and ordered CBSE and Central government to answer them.

CBSE went to Supreme Court against this order.

Should Supreme Court ask for response from the petitioners? It did not. It simply set aside the high court order. Further, in order to pre-empt any such cases being filed in other states, Supreme Court orders that no other court should hear any case regarding NEET. This is fundamentally illegal.

Supreme Court is not the boss to high court. Both are constitutional courts. Both have the authority to interpret the constitution. ‘You can’t hear. I only can.’ What kind of justice is this?

The same thing happened in Jayalalithaa’s disproportionate assets case. After being convicted by CBI trial court, Jaya appealed in Karnataka high court and sought bail. There is a 40 page judgement by Karnataka high court, as to why Jayalalitha should not be let out on bail.

They go to Supreme Court. What H L Dattu [then supreme court chief justice] does? One single line. “Released on bail”. Not only that. “This case should be disposed within these many days. Till then, I hold on to this case. No one else should hear it.”

Such a kind of highhandedness. That is what pushed Anitha to death.

If we call such a court as brahminical court, what is wrong with it?

  • It does not only mean that they are against the reservation. Brahminism violates the rights of nationalities, states and basic rights of common people very easily. Likewise, Supreme Court also violates them very easily.
  • How Nirmala Sitharaman or the likes of her change their stand, Supreme Court also does the same thing.
  • How brahminism believes itself above laws and traditions that they themselves formulated, Supreme Court also works the same way.

Everyone knows this. Educationalists also know this fact. But they all hesitate to discuss it.

The same thing happened in Jayalalithaa’s disproportionate assets case. After being convicted by CBI trial court, Jaya appealed in Karnataka high court and sought bail.

But BJPians don’t have any such hesitation.

  • When, Ram Rahim was convicted in rape case and sentenced for 20 years, BJP national president Amith Shah, as per news in national dailies, is said to have put the blame on the judge for the riots that followed.
  • They put posters calling Cunha [the judge who convinced Jayalalithaa in the corruption case] dog and jackal.
  • When a case regarding judges appointment came to Supreme Court, what the current finance minister Arun Jaitley said ‘it is tyranny of unelected’.

Tamil Nadu government went to Supreme Court in many cases for its own purposes

  • They went to Supreme Court against road workers [appointed by Tamil Nadu government] to ruin their lives.
  • They did the same against people welfare workers [appointed by Tamil Nadu government].
  • When Kovan [of PALA] got bail in the sedition case foisted on him, they went to Supreme Court opposing it.
  • There was a case of liquor shop of a village named Kalingapatti. To keep this one single shop open, you went up to Supreme Court.

You went on appeal in how many cases? You filed review petition in how many cases? But, for the sake of students of Tamil Nadu like Anitha, why didn’t you follow your regular procedure?

Main case is gathering dust. Did Tamilnadu lawyer ask the Supreme Court at least once to settle the main case first before issuing order? Now, who should take the blame for the death of Anitha?

There was a debate in TV. BJP man asks, “why you ask us, it is Supreme Court’s order, why don’t you people question Supreme Court.” Now that we question Supreme Court, they say, “how dare, you question Supreme Court. If it says something we cannot oppose it.” They call us anti-nationals.

This is a crime committed by all of them. Central government, state government, Supreme Court. All of them in unison. All the three are responsible for Anitha’s death and other girls like Anitha dying slow death, facing bleak future.

If you question, you are anti-national. They would commit all kinds of atrocities and if you question, they will call you traitor to the nation. This is not new.

[Continued in 5. Why NEET or what ails medical education?]

Series Navigation<< The curious case of NEET in Supreme CourtWhy NEET or what ails medical education? >>

Permanent link to this article:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this:
Read more:
Right thinking persons of all backgrounds condemn demonetisation move

"utter nonsense. complete choas by RBI. if anybody have 5 lakhs before this event, can he draw full.insane RBI/GOVT, does...

Heartless Wipro of ‘Padma Vibhushan’ Premji Ruins Employee Lives

If we continue to fold our hands and be happy to have our jobs even as our seniors and colleagues...