Background

NEET-MDS aspirants are once again knocking on the doors of the Supreme Court, expressing concerns over the Union Government’s alleged indecision regarding the postponement of the NEET-MDS 2024 exam scheduled for March 18. The Union, as per a previous order on February 21, was expected to make a decision on the postponement of the exam and the extension of the internship completion cut-off date. In light of the perceived lack of action, the petitioners have filed a Miscellaneous Application (MA), urging the restoration of the writ petition that was disposed of by the Court on February 21 based on the Union’s assurances. The aspirants claim that the Union has not provided a final decision within a week of receiving representations from the students.

Scheduled Exam and Internship Deadline: NEET-MDS Aspirants’ Conundrum

The entrance test is slated to take place on March 18, with candidates deemed eligible only upon the completion of their internships on or before March 31. The petitioners’ counsel brought this pressing matter before Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, who instructed them to send an email request. The CJI assured them that a date for listing the case would be promptly fixed.

Union’s Undertaking and the Ongoing Non-Compliance Dilemma

On February 21, the Union informed the Supreme Court that it was actively considering the grievances of NEET-MDS candidates concerning the extension of the internship deadline. The Court refrained from issuing an order on the plea to postpone NEET-MDS 2024, giving the Union a week to decide on the matter. However, the recent application highlights that the Union has not made a decision on the postponement despite the impending examination date. According to the application, the petitioners state, “However, despite the order and despite the examination date looming in, the respondents have not taken any decision in this regard till Date.” The application further notes, “A number of emails and representations were submitted to the respondents both through email and in physical form wherein the dental students have set out their grievances and reiterated their request to postpone the exam and increase the cutoff date. However, the respondents have not acted upon any such representations till date.”

Prayer for Intervention and Parity with NEET PG

Seeking the Court’s intervention for the restoration of the writ petition, the petitioners urge the Union to comply with the order dated February 21, 2024. Additionally, they request the Court to order the rescheduling of NEET-MDS 2024 exams, emphasizing parity with the common counseling for NEET PG and NEET MDS. The application also seeks an extension of the eligibility cut-off date, considering the delayed completion of internships by BDS students. The foundation for filing the current petition stems from the rescheduling of NEET PG 2024 by the National Board of Examinations (NBE), which shifted the exam from March 3rd to July 7th, 2024, with a cutoff date of August 15, 2024. In contrast, NEET MDS, notified on January 20, 2024, is scheduled for March 18th, 2024, with an internship completion cutoff date of March 31, 2024. The petitioners argue that the cutoff date is arbitrary and underscores the need for uniformity.

The Prayer of the Application Seeks the Following for NEET-MDS Aspirants:

A). Pass an order allowing the application for the restoration of the above-captioned writ petition and direct the respondents to comply with the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in the present writ petition.

B). Pass an order thereby directing the Respondents to reschedule NEET MDS 2024 in furtherance of the consistent practice and policy to conduct entrance exams and common counseling for NEET PG and NEET MDS, ensuring parity.

C). Pass an order thereby directing the Respondents to extend the last date of the cut-off for eligibility suitably:

1. after ascertaining the internship completion date from universities offering MDS Course across India;
2. in accordance with the existing policy to conduct entrance exams and common counseling for NEET PG and NEET MDS and/or;

Discrimination in Cut-off Date – Putting Lives of 8000 NEET-MDS Aspirants at Stake

The application underscores the discriminatory nature of fixing the eligibility cut-off date as March 31, 2024, highlighting that 40% of the 2018 BDS batch interns won’t complete their internships by then. The argument emphasizes the overlap in the UG course curriculum for BDS and MBBS students, both facing delays due to the COVID-19 period. The application stresses the need for a uniform approach, questioning the discrepancy in the cut-off dates for MBBS and BDS students. “Roughly 8000 students all across India including Kerala, Orissa, MP, UP, J&K, AP & Rajasthan will be excluded.” The application highlights the challenges NEET-MDS aspirants face and their plea for a fair and equitable resolution in light of the unique circumstances surrounding their internships and examinations. Both the BDS as well as the MBBS students went through the Covid period together and suffered the same delays in the holding of the yearly examinations and training. Therefore, it is discriminatory for the cutoff date to be pushed back from 31 March 2024 to 15th August 2024 for the 2018 batch of MBBS interns, and not for the BDS students. Counselling for the MBBS students and BDS students after the internship period is over has always been held at the same time.”

The post NEET-MDS Aspirants Seek Supreme Court Intervention Amidst Postponement Uncertainty appeared first on Bhatt & Joshi Associates.

Introduction

A story that was published by the digital news site ‘The Print’ on the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) was the subject of a recent ruling by the Delhi High Court, which dismissed a petition that sought to prevent the publication of ‘The Print’s Article on RAW. In its views, the court, which was led by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, emphasized the centrality of the right to know as well as the freedom of the press.

The context is as follows

A petition was submitted by a lawyer named Raghav Awasthi, which requested that the Union Government prevent the publication of an article in The Print titled “Nijjar-Pannun effect: RAW downs shutters in North America 1st time since inception in 1968.” The piece was scheduled to be published on November 30, 2022. Awasthi argued that the article jeopardised the careers of the officers that were listed, causing them to be labelled as Intelligence Officers and impairing their ability to operate at other Indian missions.

The Print’s Article on RAW: Observations of the Court

The plea was rejected by the division bench, which emphasised that Awasthi’s arguments were speculative and did not have a solid factual basis. According to the court’s initial assessment, the article did not put the officers’ careers at risk or endanger the well-being of their families. This was the conclusion reached by the court.

Furthermore, the court emphasised that the Government of India has the ability, in accordance with the applicable law, to take action against any periodical or item that is judged to be compromising to the safety and security of the general public. The judgement emphasised the importance of exercising prudence in issues that involve intelligence or diplomatic ties, and it warned against judicial intrusions into these delicate areas of concern.

Important Takeaways from the Court’s Decision

1. Freedom of the Press and the Right to Know: The court acknowledged that the publishing of the article implicated multiple aspects of freedom of the press and the right to know, thereby highlighting the significance of these values.
2. Hypothetical Nature of Claims: The court dismissed Awasthi’s claims, citing the fact that they were hypothetical and that there was no tangible evidence to support them.
3. Authorities of the Government: The decision brought to light the authority of the government to take action against content that poses a threat to the safety and security of the nation.
4. Caution in Sensitive topics: The court emphasised the significance of handling topics pertaining to intelligence and foreign relations with extraordinary care and caution, and it advised against easy judicial intrusion in such areas.

Concluding Remarks on The Print’s Article on RAW

By rejecting the petition, the Delhi High Court acknowledged the centrality of the right to know and freedom of the press, as well as the authority of the government in situations pertaining to problems of national security. The decision highlights the delicate balance that must be maintained when discussing topics that involve intelligence, diplomatic relations, and the role of media outlets in guaranteeing responsible journalism.

The post The Print’s Article on RAW : Delhi High Court Affirms Freedom of Press and Right to Know in Dismissing Plea appeared first on Bhatt & Joshi Associates.