Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

OBC Quota Not 'Sucking Off' NEET-AIQ Seats; It Sets Off Social Inequality : DMK Tells Supreme Court

Srishti Ojha
23 Oct 2021 6:37 AM GMT
OBC Quota Not Sucking Off NEET-AIQ Seats; It Sets Off Social Inequality : DMK Tells Supreme Court
x

While stressing that the OBC candidates were denied thousands of seats in the NEET-All India Quota in the previous years, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam Party has urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the petitions filed by NEET aspirants challenging Centre's decision to grant OBC reservations of 27% in the NEET-AIQ.The directions have been sought through written submissions made by DMK in a batch...

While stressing that the OBC candidates were denied thousands of seats in the NEET-All India Quota in the previous years, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam Party has urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the petitions filed by NEET aspirants challenging Centre's decision to grant OBC reservations of 27% in the NEET-AIQ.

The directions have been sought through written submissions made by DMK in a batch of petitions filed by NEET aspirants challenging the decision of the Central Government to introduce 27% OBC and 10% EWS reservation in the NEET-AIQ.

The written statement states that the Union of India through its notice dated 29th July 2020 has implemented 27% reservation for OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) along with 10% EWS reservation in 15% UG and 50% PG in All India Quota seats State contributed Seats after an extensive legal battle by the DMK to implement OBC reservations in SCS-AIQ.

" Vide the impugned notice the Union has set right the anomaly for OBCs after a period of 13 years. The granting of impugned reservations of 27% for OBC's in the SCS- AIQ would benefit around 4000 students this year and would cause a positive domino effect on the society at large." the DMK has said.

The DMK has sought to implead itself in the petitions challenging the OBC quota in NEET-AIQ.

Policy of reservations is to set-off inequality & not "sucking off seats"

The DMK has submitted that social justice is a facet of equality which is a fundamental right and policy of reservations is to set-off inequality, bridge the gap between equals and un-equals, remove manifest imbalance for those lagging behind, and remedy the past historical discrimination and injustice done to a social class of people. It is an affirmative action and the same is not "sucking off seats" as described by the Petitioner's counsel.

"Reservation is a right of share in education and employment in order to bring a level playing field. Policy of reservation is part of the State's duty to promote socio economic justice enshrined in the Preamble of the constitution and the fundamental rights." the affidavit states.

27% Reservation Can't Be Subject Matter Of Litigation Again and Again:

The applicant has argued that the granting of 27% reservation to OBCs cannot be a subject matter of litigation again and again when the Court had already settled the issue.

The applicant has submitted that after consistent attempts by the Union Government to delay its legal battle on the same issue before Madras High Court, the Madras High Court through a detailed judgement held that there is no legal or constitutional impediment for extending the benefit of reservation to the other backward categories in the SCS-AIQ seats of UG or PG medical courses in the State-run Medical Colleges within Tamil Nadu subject to any further directions and orders of the Apex Court.

Further, while the petitioners before the Supreme Court have challenged the Union's notification providing reservations, they have conveniently not challenged the Madras High Court's judgement which led Union of India to issue such a notice in the first place.

The DMK has argued that the writ Petitions before the top Court are nothing but a malafide attempt to hinder the admission process of UG and PG Diploma Courses in the field of Medicine and to cause hurdle in providing admissions to the OBC candidates covered under the impugned Notice dated 29th july.

Further it has been argued that the reservations for OBCs are given in DNB seats for PG courses also by the Union Government all these years but the Petitioners have not chosen to challenge the same.

The DMK has stated that one of the grounds urged before the Court is that reservations cannot be granted by the Union under the impugned Notice and should be by way of a law enacted by Parliament. However , this argument is without reference to Art 15(4) and 15(5) of the Constitution and Supreme Court's judgment in Indra Sawhney's case which upheld reservations granted through Office Memorandum to OBCs.

"The petitioners had challenged the reservation policy under the Notice dated 29.07.2021 for this academic year alone and there is no legally tenable grounds as to why the reservation should be denied for this year alone." the DMK has stated.

Click here to read/download the written submissions



Next Story