![]() Wednesday, Jun 15, 2005 |
| Tamil Nadu | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Tamil Nadu
Special Correspondent
CHENNAI: It is not the Tamil Nadu Government's new admission policy on professional courses, but the timing which is posing a big question, observed the Madras High Court during arguments on a batch of writ petitions from Plus-Two students. Justice P.D. Dinakaran, who later referred all the cases to the Chief Justice for being posted before a Division Bench, concurred with the submissions by senior counsel for the petitioner-students. He said, "none of us here is opposed to the policy...I am not going to pass any judicial order. Let the Government take a wise decision without delay." Though he did not stay the operation of the impugned order, the judge did record the undertaking given by the Advocate-General, N.R. Chandran, that the actual selection under the new scheme would not be finalised before June 23. The Government is to file its counter-affidavit by that day. Mr. Justice Dinakaran also extended the time granted for sending new applications under the new scheme. As against the existing deadline of June 23, the modified date will be June 30. The order also stipulated that if improvement candidates applied for copies of the "unimproved marksheets" certified duplicate copies must be issued within five days of receipt of the applications. Admitting all the petitions, the judge said: "In view of the larger public interest involved in this batch, and as it is also brought to the notice of this court by the Advocate-General that similar matters have been filed before the Madurai Bench, the Registry is directed to place the papers relating to this batch before the Chief Justice for necessary orders." Earlier, Mr. Chandran submitted that dispensing with the common entrance examination was a "policy decision", and asked, "do they [petitioner-students] have a right to demand an entrance examination?" Additional Advocate-General A.L. Somayaji said the existing prospectus had been withdrawn and a new one was under preparation. Reiterating that the qualifying examination alone was sufficient for professional course admissions, he said all relevant factors such as the status of rural students in the entrance examination and admissions were considered. Senior counsel K.M. Vijayan said the petitioners were not against giving effect to the impugned order from next year. "They cannot withdraw a merit scheme just because it had created certain problems." Mr. Justice Dinakaran asked, "do you mean to say rural students have to suffer because the entrance system was in vogue for over 20 years?" Earlier in the morning, advocate Manikandan mentioned a related matter before the First Bench comprising Chief Justice Markandey Katju and Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla prompting the Bench to order the transfer of all connected cases to the First Bench itself. On Wednesday, similar petitions are scheduled to be taken up for admission in the Madurai Bench. They will also be transferred, for being heard by the First Bench.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|