New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a special leave petition (SLP) filed by the Tamil Nadu Government against a Madras High Court judgment quashing a State legislation scrapping the Common Entrance Test (CET) for State Board students for admission to professional courses for 2006-2007.

With the apex court not staying the High Court order at present and deciding to take up the case again on April 13, students will have to wait till then to know whether there will be a CET for this year or not.

A Bench, comprising Justice K. G. Balakrishnan and Justice P. P. Naolekar, ordered notice to the students (respondents) who had challenged the validity of the Act before the High Court.

Senior counsel, Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the State said that the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Admission in Professional Courses Act, 2006, dispensing with the CET for State Board students (and not for CBSE students) was enacted under Article 15 (5) of the Constitution subsequent to the amendment empowering States to make special provisions for the advancement of socially and educationally backward class citizens.

He said the High Court, without even allowing the legislation to be tested for this year, struck down the Act.

He pleaded for stay of the operation of the impugned judgment.

Anxious wait

Senior counsel, Nalini Chidambaram and K.M. Vijayan, appearing for the students opposed even grant of notice on the SLP stating that the CET which was being conducted for over two decades should be allowed to be conducted for the ensuing academic year.

They said the students were worried whether the CET would be held or not for this year.

They said that the Anna University had stated that it required at least eight weeks to prepare for the CET.

If there were any further delay there would be further chaos and confusion they said and pleaded that the CET must be held as per the High Court judgment.

The Bench, however, asked the counsel to file their replies so that arguments could be advanced on the stay applications on April 13.

The SLP said the High Court erred in holding that the State legislation impinged on the field occupied by the Central law.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail