Tamil Nadu Goes To Top Court Against President Not Clearing NEET Exemption Bill

The Tamil Nadu government has filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the President of India's decision to withhold assent to the state's NEET Exemption Bill - legislation passed unanimously by the Assembly to restore medical admissions based on Class XII marks rather than the national entrance test.

In its petition, the State calls the decision "patently unconstitutional and arbitrary", arguing that withholding assent without any reasons violates Articles 201 and 254(2) of the Constitution and has created a "grave constitutional impasse". The Bill, which was passed twice, was forwarded under provisions that allow a State law on a concurrent subject to prevail even if it conflicts with a Central law, provided it receives Presidential assent.

The government contends that the President's refusal was based mechanically on the Union Government's advice despite detailed clarifications already submitted by Tamil Nadu. Such action, it says, undermines the federal balance and renders Article 201 ineffective, crippling the autonomy of States to legislate on matters reserved for them.

The state has argued that the current withholding of assent contradicts similar earlier decisions and erodes constitutional consistency. It has also highlighted other instances where Presidents approved State laws that conflicted with Central legislation - including Tamil Nadu's own Jallikattu law, and labour law amendments in several States.

During the UPA era, President APJ Abdul Kalam granted Tamil Nadu exemption from entrance tests for medical admissions, enabling the State to introduce its Class XII-based system.

Reiterating its long-standing position, Tamil Nadu argues that NEET disproportionately benefits affluent students who can afford expensive private coaching, while working against high-performing but poor, rural and government-school students who cannot. The Justice AK Rajan Committee - based on over 80,000 responses - found that NEET had structurally excluded disadvantaged groups and skewed admissions heavily towards coaching-centre repeaters.

'Strengthened Healthcare Outcomes'

In its petition, Tamil Nadu has stressed that for nearly a decade before NEET became mandatory, the state had abolished any form of entrance test for medical admissions and successfully admitted students solely on the basis of Class XII marks with scientific normalisation. This system, it says, produced high-quality doctors and strengthened public healthcare outcomes.

Politically, except the BJP, all parties in Tamil Nadu, including those in the opposition, strongly support NEET exemption, describing it as essential to safeguard social justice and equitable access to medical education.

Anti-NEET campaigners argue that the exam primarily benefits private medical colleges, many run by politicians, by ensuring a steady stream of admissions at prohibitively expensive fees that only the wealthy can afford. They point out that even low NEET scorers with weak Class XII marks gain admission if they can afford hefty fees. Supporters of NEET, however, maintain that the test rewards critical thinking and application-based learning, producing better-trained doctors.

Tamil Nadu has asked the Supreme Court to declare the President's withholding of assent unconstitutional and to deem the Bill as having received assent under Article 254(2). Alternatively, it has sought a direction to the Union Government to resubmit the Bill to the President for fresh consideration.