Jaya: Testing times

Chennai, June 27: Entrance examinations will not exit in a hurry.

Madras High Court today quashed the Tamil Nadu government’s order scrapping the common entrance test for admissions to professional colleges.

The case and its outcome have larger implications because abolition of entrance tests is among the proposals being debated by a central committee on examination reforms.

Overturning the Jayalalithaa government’s decision, the court said that under the regulations, a common entrance test is mandatory when there is more than one examining board/body in a state and also in the light of the directives of the Supreme Court.

Over 400 writ petitions were filed challenging the government’s June 9 order, which said students should be admitted to professional courses purely on the basis of their Plus Two examination marks.

The verdict has raised hopes for hundreds of students aspiring to enrol in professional courses this year after the CET result was declared on May 12.

De-stressing students’ life was the objective behind the central proposal to do away with such tests but the Jayalalithaa government had taken the decision to remove a perceived discrimination against rural students in the entrance question papers.

Rejecting the government’s contention that there will be no discrimination if only the Plus Two marks are considered for admission, the judges said: “It is well settled that Article 14 of the Constitution will be violated not only if equals are treated unequally, but also if unequals are treated equally.”

“The impugned G.. (government order) of the state higher education department is clearly violative of the selection criteria fixed in the regulations stipulated by bodies like the Medical Council of India, the All India Council For Technical Education and the like, as well as Article 14 of the Constitution (ensuring equality),” the bench of Chief Justice Markendey Katju and Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla said.

If the test is abolished, “there will be discrimination between students who appear in the examination conducted by an examination body which is more stringent in giving marks vis-?-vis the students who appear in the qualifying examination conducted by a more liberal examining body,” the judges added.

The court said it “appreciated and understood” the state’s concerns on rural students being handicapped. But it was for the government to get a “detailed study” done and make recommendations to councils concerned to make amendments.

However, the court declined to interfere with another part of the government’s order that abolished the “improvement examination” for Plus Two students to better their marks and, thus, their chances of getting into professional colleges.

Admissions to professional courses in the state are based on an average of the marks in the entrance test and that in the Plus Two examination.