BY INVITATION. A NEET conundrum

Two years into the implementation of the National Eligibility and Entrance Test (NEET, as it is popularly known), it stands mired in controversy. The recent tragic suicide of an aspiring medical student in Tamil Nadu, who had failed to qualify in the examination, caused much outrage. Similarly, the prestigious Christian Medical College, Vellore, has refused to fill any seats barring one, citing a loss of autonomy with the introduction of NEET. This impasse has many wondering whether the examination was more disruptive than reformatory.

NEET was rightly introduced as a wide-ranging reform to set right the inconsistencies in the allocation of medical seats to candidates keen to become doctors. Earlier, piece-meal reforms had led to a bric-a-brac system of tests and selections that injected arbitrariness into the process of selection of candidates. An overarching examination like NEET was necessitated because of this lack of uniformity in admissions to medical colleges across India. The Central government conducted the Pre-Medical Test for its quota of seats; private medical colleges, other public institutions and autonomous bodies conducted their own tests. This often led to students having to give over a dozen exams, each imposing stress and strain on the purse strings and mental acuity of candidates. The NEET regime mandated that all potential candidates had to clear one exam in order to secure a seat. The CBSE was mandated with conducting the exam while the Director General of Health Services acts like the clearinghouse in seat allocation.

The opposition to NEET had been multi-fold and almost immediate. Telangana, Andhra Pradesh and J&K have opted out of the NEET system. Tamil Nadu, which previously, had an 85 per cent quota for candidates who had studied in its State education system, filed petitions in the Supreme Court against NEET. Private medical colleges too petitioned against the examination, but thankfully the primacy of NEET was upheld by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court. Therefore, NEET is not going away anytime soon. But given the polarisation between the Centre and the States, the opposition by medical colleges like CMC and students alike, what is the future of this crucial reform?

NEET represents a unique intersection in public policy-making. It brings together the autonomy of State governments in school and medical education with the ability of the Centre to bring uniformity. Then again, it marks an intersection between the CBSE and State education boards, which have been at loggerheads on NEET. Also, the issue of State domiciles and the need to ensure adequate availability of seats for all students, with primacy of merit over domicile, festers without consensus.

Given the acute shortage of doctors, it is almost criminal that hundreds of seats are going unfilled because of confusion and disagreements between governments, administrators and college authorities.

As a first step, the government needs to ensure that no student is left in the lurch, as a consensus emerges on the way forward. Relaxing the number of attempts and the maximum age for a period of two years will ensure this. Similarly, there is a need to increase the Centre’s quota of seats from 15 per cent, given the disproportionate spread of medical colleges in the country. For example, students of the North-East are at a disadvantage; given the shortage of medical colleges in that region, they don’t enjoy the advantage of State domicile. Third, the government must ensure that no seats remain unfilled. And finally, there is a need for a NEET Council on the lines of the GST Council to resolve all outstanding issues in a time-bound manner. We owe this to our budding doctors who have reposed faith in a profession that will ensure a healthier India.

The writer is a doctor and health administrator in the private sector. Views expressed are personal.

COMMENT NOW