It is no surprise then that Tamil Nadu, which has a century-long tradition of social justice, was at the forefront of opposing NEET.
Anitha, a young Dalit teenager from Kuzhumur village, Ariyalur district, committed suicide on 1 September because she could not secure a medical seat after the imposition of NEET as the main criterion for medical college admissions.
But she sought exemption from National Eligibility and Entrance Test (NEET) in the Supreme Court, not on the basis of her socio-economic background — she lost her mother ten years ago and her father works as a daily-wage load worker — but on the basis of merit. She had scored 1176 marks out of 1200 in her Class 12, and a 196.75 cut-off mark under the counselling method, which should have guaranteed a seat in all the top medical institutes in the state. But she didn’t get admission into an MBBS course due to poor scores in NEET.
Arguments about merit are often used as a political weapon to control, suppress and degrade people from underprivileged sections of society. The stand by the government and the Supreme Court stifled a young genius like Anitha.
In a state whose political legacy of identity politics is steeped in Tamil sub-nationalism, reservations, assertion of state autonomy and resisting imposition of Hindi language, this suicide resonates widely. The late chief minister M. G. Ramachandran was strongly opposed to the interference of the Centre in matters related to education and health. Former chief minister J. Jayalalitha had opposed NEET.
The imposition of NEET as a single elimination process in the country with its vast diversity is absurd, violates states’ autonomy and the principles of reasonable decentralization.
Does NEET uphold merit? Does NEET stand for fairness and equity? Is it the push for homogenization?
Tamil Nadu has one of the best public health care and medical education systems in India and has 23 medical colleges. Without NEET, which is conducted by the CBSE, the state has produced thousands of talented doctors from modest backgrounds. The admission to MBBS seats in the state government counselling is fairly accessible to students from downtrodden sections. NEET will prevent a number of underprivileged students from securing admission in medical education. Only the rich elites, who can spend lakhs of rupees at coaching centres, can now corner these seats.
It is no surprise then that Tamil Nadu, which has a century-long tradition of social justice, is at the forefront of opposing NEET. There is no study to establish that Tamil Nadu has become relatively inefficient because of its counselling-based medical admissions. On the contrary, Tamil Nadu is a leader in healthcare. You can run into thousands of great physicians, surgeons and experts in every discipline of medicine who have obtained medical degrees right after finishing +2, without NEET.
The demise of the dynamic J. Jayalalithaa resulted in political chaos as the ruling party AIADMK broke up into different factions, making them politically inept at safeguarding the state’s autonomy. Hence, the state government put up a weak fight in the apex court, seeking exemptions only for the seats of the government colleges and government quota.
The Parliamentary Committee on NEET had observed that an exemption for states that do not wish to come under NEET should be allowed. This was a solid ground for the apex court to reject the prayer of Nalini Chidambram for NEET-based admissions. The least the apex court could have done is to have exempted Anitha as an impleader in the Tamil Nadu case.
Some people have asked how a person who commits suicide can be considered a rebel. Others asked if she was weak-willed. She definitely wasn’t.
R. Vijayasankar, the editor of Frontline, recently wrote in a Facebook post: “No separate room in her house; no air-conditioner or even fan; she has no cell phone; she has no qualified and affluent mother nor father who avail ten days leave to stay with and help her; besides her no flask with coffee /tea while doing overnight study; no grandpa saying ‘those days we were in government service, you know’; She has no uncle who works in American IT company earning dollars and comes once in a year with a Ray ban sunglass; she cannot offer for Rs. 500/- or 1000/- per hour based tuition teacher; no weekend cinema or restaurant; No place to go for a holiday; despite that she secures 1176 (of 1200 in +2) This is actual merit!!”
Anitha resorted to the extreme step only after exploring all possibilities for justice. She had come up through the system despite her struggle with an extremely poor socio-economic background, and her scholarship and performance came against all odds.
The author is Associate Professor, Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai.
Nice article Dr. Lakshmanan, where can I read your scholarly articles ?
While Dr Lakshmanan’s write-up is lucid and places in perspective the plight of the poor Anithas of our oppressive and highly iniquitous society, larger issues need to be addressed.
NEET is not at all neat as it is preposterously “one size fits all”, about which Lakshmanan has also drawn attention. In a federal set up such as India Centre should not be an interloper and the judiciary has to be judicious in its dispensation without being insensitive to the imperfections and inadequacies of society. If the Centre cannot have CBSE in state schools, by the same logic it cannot regulate higher education admission through lop-sided policies. If a state insists that it will have its own admission system, NEET and such other merit-tests should be limited to only central institutions, where also students from any state can compete if they wish. That said there should be proper mechanism to ensure that even the poorest of the poor student has access to professional or any other type of education if she has the requisite marks.
If Anitha had got admission would she have managed to bear the exorbitant cost of her education unless some Nilekanis sitting on huge money bags came forward to sponsor her?
What we need to ask is why professional education is so expensive in our country, particularly in the case of medical education. There is obviously a demand-supply mismatch. There should be a lot more quality institutions so that no deserving student will be left out. While I believe in merit, I also treat it as contingent on many factors. If NEET is treated as the measure of all measures obviously there is something seriously wrong with the policy framework.
Experience has shown that proliferation of engineering colleges for profit and greed has not helped the deserving students; many of these colleges are gradually disappearing. Medical education in the private sector is worse. Higher education, particularly professional education cannot spread across the entire social spectrum unless demand-supply mismatch, affordability of aspiring students, quality of teaching, institutional ambience and related issues are addressed.
We have instances of parents sending their children to countries like China where medical education is cheap and admission is without the rigour and trauma of hell. Whether India values degrees from China is a different issue.
Last issue: As the best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry, youth should be made to think realistically. Failure to get a medical seat should not be the end of one’s life. Youth should be made to value their life irrespective of hurdles and denials on their path. Our youth turning increasingly suicidogenic is worrisome. This malady should get a lot more attention than passing the NEET muster.
Well written. Just for curiosity, any data available for comparing the socio-economic background of students admitted under non-NEET (pre 2017) and NEET (2017)?
True but now only the elite especially owning cars are there for medical admission.
Wasn’t it the Supreme court that ordered NEET as compulsory? 80% of colleges in Tamil Nadu are owned by politicians and they don’t want NEET. In fact, even now, only 50% of medical seats have been filled in TN.
who owns 23 government colleges? No state in India has such huge in number. in service doctors of 50% government quota in medical higher education. Those who availed with condition should serve in the government hospital for entire life, if one wish to leave in the middle of the career he/she should repay money incurred by tax payers money. Under the NEET anyone availing the admission would go and mint money elsewhere. TN is much more serious and efficient.