logo
‘No admission roadblock after SC's OBC order'

‘No admission roadblock after SC's OBC order'

Time of India3 days ago
1
2
Kolkata: The Supreme Court order on Monday regarding the OBC reservation issue removes all roadblocks from publishing the CAP (centralised admission portal) merit list after July 30, senior Bengal officials said on Monday.
The legal team advising the education department on this matter clearly stated that there was no legal roadblock to proceed with the UG admissions as per the 2025 OBC list.
According to the updated 2025 OBC list, 76 communities have been additionally classified as OBC A and B categories. Earlier, the 2010 OBC list had 64 OBC communities. This has also increased the OBC reservations from 7% before 2010 to 17% in 2025. The continued legal ambiguity over the process prompted the education dept to revise its CAP admission deadline three times.
The first deadline was July 1, the second was July 15, and the third was July 25.
Now it has been extended till July 30. The ambiguity has not only held back CAP but also the crucial WBJEE results. Presidency University admissions were also delayed due to this.
Merit list publication was pending for undergraduate college admission due to this issue. The deadline for receiving applications for UG courses was extended till July 30.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Villas For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You
Villas in Dubai | Search Ads
Get Info
Undo
State education minister Bratya Basu posted on X handle, saying, "Today's stay in the Hon'ble Supreme Court is a moral victory of our Hon'ble Chief Minister Smt Mamata Banerjee. We in the higher education department already anticipated this and are fully prepared to take appropriate actions immediately.
"
You Can Also Check:
Kolkata AQI
|
Weather in Kolkata
|
Bank Holidays in Kolkata
|
Public Holidays in Kolkata
After this order, department officials are relieved that no further extension is required as the Supreme Court gave a clear order on Monday.
A higher official said, "We are waiting for the order copy after which the final process will be initiated."
The department will soon upload a link for the students to submit their category details and update choices. According to Debanjan Mandal, managing partner, Fox & Mandal, which is advising the Bengal govt, around nine lakh UG admissions were impacted. "The shadow of uncertainty over the undergraduate admissions has been lifted by the apex court order.
The order will now ease the process," he told TOI.
The admission limbo was primarily for students from the additional 76 OBC communities. An earlier Calcutta High Court order allowed the 64 pre-2010 OBC groups to apply. The issue posed no difficulty to them. Applicants belonging to the additional 76 groups could not avail themselves of their OBC reservation quota. "Reservation is not a charity; it is a constitutional mandate.
And it is settled in law — also reiterated by the apex court today — that the executive is well within its right to make this decision," Mandal added.
Retired Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee, who also heads the state backward classes commission — the body which recommended the fresh OBC list to the Bengal govt — told TOI, "I have not seen the SC order. But from what I have heard, there remains no hurdles to implement the 2025 OBC list in Bengal. I am absolutely sure about that. Moreover, it was not the OBC list which was under challenge in Calcutta High Court, it was the manner it was being implemented.
I have no two views on it, the fresh OBC list can be implemented now."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Migration, religion, language: Bengal's new political churn
Migration, religion, language: Bengal's new political churn

Hindustan Times

time30 minutes ago

  • Hindustan Times

Migration, religion, language: Bengal's new political churn

A lot of working-class settlements across Indian cities – including the national capital Delhi and its suburbs of Noida and Gurugram, Mumbai and others in states where the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is in power – have seen special drives to detect what the Indian state believes are illegal Bangladeshi migrants. At the receiving end of the drive are thousands of poor, blue-collar Bengali speaking Muslims. Whether or not they are illegal Bangladeshis in India is something which is difficult to ascertain. Even the authorities have been able to flag only a miniscule proportion of these people as illegal Bangladeshis. But that's cold comfort; the chilling effect and inconvenience this drive has unleashed on Bengali speaking Muslims in these cities has affected a lot more people. To be sure, poor Bengali Muslims are not the only kind of underclass to have faced police harassment in India. There are a lot of examples, from evictions in large cities to the police siding with perpetrators of caste violence in villages, where the poor are more likely to suffer at the hands of the law-and-order machinery. However, in many such cases, the poor are also able to fight back by political mobilisation. More often than not, it is by cutting deals with politicians (in return for votes) than direct agitational recourse. This is roughly what political scientist Partha Chaterjee has termed as 'political society' where the poor, even though they are in violation of some laws, are able to preserve their interests by leveraging their votes. The current crackdown against so-called Bangladeshis (read Bengali Muslims), however, is different. The recourse to 'political society' insurance in the place where the crackdown is taking place is not really an option. The BJP is not interested in votes of Bengali Muslims or Muslims generally. In fact, the BJP being in power is something which is always despite rather than because of the Muslim vote. The 'political society' which is sympathetic to the cause of these people – the anti-BJP political spectrum in West Bengal – does not have jurisdiction in this matter. The ruling Trinamool Congress, which is the overwhelming recipient of Muslim votes in the state of West Bengal, has been extremely vocal on the targeting of Bengali speaking Muslims which is currently underway. But the best Mamata Banerjee and her government can offer these people is a right to stay safely in the state of West Bengal. The irony is, these people would have never left if their home state – assuming most of them are from West Bengal and not Bangladesh – had the kind of economic opportunities which have attracted them to more prosperous, growing and therefore income generating cities outside West Bengal. Also Read: Bengal migrant worker alleges torture by Haryana police; minister visits him The helplessness involved here is particularly damning for Mamata Banerjee. The BJP has polled almost 40% of the vote share in the past three Lok Sabha and assembly elections held in West Bengal since the 2019 Lok Sabha one. The Trinamool Congress, however, has managed to win each of these elections with a greater vote share than the BJP. Given the fact that almost 30% (it was 27% in 2011 census) of West Bengal's population is Muslim and assuming that they do not vote for the BJP, one can deduce that the BJP already has the support of the majority of Hindus in the state of West Bengal. The only reason it cannot defeat the Trinamool is the latter's support among Muslims. In fact, the rise in Trinamool's footprint in Muslim-dominated regions of north Bengal – it has come at the cost of the Congress and the CPI (M) in the post-2014 period – suggests that there has been a Muslim consolidation behind the Trinamool with the BJP's rise in the state of West Bengal (more on this later). While Muslim support in West Bengal is crucial for Banerjee's and her party's survival in the state, she can do precious little to prevent their harassment in BJP-ruled states where these Muslim migrants go in search of better income opportunities. If this asymmetry continues, Mamata's political capital among the Bengali Muslims is bound to diminish although the chances of Muslims deserting her or her party are still pretty low. There is nothing more demoralizing for a politician than not being able to do something for their core voter base facing persecution. Two more questions need to be asked before concluding this column. What does this persecution mean for India's larger political economy? Free migration for the underclass has been the biggest engine of (relative) upward mobility in post-reform India. It is the most effective engine of trickle-down growth in India's small pockets of opulence where high-income middle-class settlements employ many blue-collar workers either directly (domestic helps etc.) or indirectly (myriad forms of manual labour). This is also a process which has largely been caste and religion agnostic so far. Adding a linguistic and religious caveat to these opportunities introduces an in-built inequality in this engine which did not exist earlier. Also read: Caught between identity, survival: Tale of a Gurugram exodus Bengal has always had a high share of Muslims in the population and Bengali Muslims have been migrating for a long time in India. What explains this new zeal to stereotype (if not outright persecution) them now? Until 2019, which is when the BJP became a close number two in the state, Muslims were part of both sides of the political aisle in the state and were divided along the fault line of the so-called 'party-society' than the typical secular-communal binary in most Indian states. What is happening in Bengal today is bringing it closer to an Assam kind of polity. The BJP already has an edge among Hindus in Bengal and is trying hard to take it beyond a critical threshold by portraying the Muslim as a foreigner. When a state has a 70%-30% population divide between the majority and minority community and the balance is more equal in large parts of the state (if one were to exclude parts like the tribal majority districts of West Bengal bordering Jharkhand and Odisha) then a communal divide in politics can be an extremely dangerous and even destabilising force. For all its failures and inadequacies, the CPI (M) which ruled the state from 1977-2011, the early years of which saw a far more unstable refugee/migration problem in West Bengal, was successful in preventing communalism in the state's politics. Political competition, as well as political violence in the state, was religion agnostic. While a status-quo-ante in terms of return of the religion agnostic 'party-society' model is extremely unlikely in West Bengal, business as usual will be increasingly tested in the days to come because of the fundamental asymmetry facing the Bengali Muslims and their party of choice. To see the ongoing 'anti-Bangladeshi' drives in BJP ruled states without this larger perspective will be missing the woods for the trees. Roshan Kishore, HT's Data and Political Economy Editor, writes a weekly column on the state of the country's economy and its political fall out, and vice-versa

NMC has asked disabled students to declare ‘what they cannot do'. This is illegal — and cruel
NMC has asked disabled students to declare ‘what they cannot do'. This is illegal — and cruel

Indian Express

time30 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

NMC has asked disabled students to declare ‘what they cannot do'. This is illegal — and cruel

It was a typical exhausting Friday at my medical college. I returned home, drained from the day, expecting nothing more than dinner and rest. Instead, what awaited me was an email from the Supreme Court of India. I was being directed — on short notice — to assess a NEET-UG aspirant with a disability the very next morning and submit my report in a sealed envelope by Monday. The court had rejected two previous assessments by AIIMS Nagpur and AIIMS Delhi. Why? Because both had done what most institutions do best — calculate percentages of disability instead of assessing a student's ability to pursue medicine. The student was Om Rathod — 88 per cent disabled due to muscular dystrophy — and yet, burning with determination to become a doctor. What the court wanted was not a number, but an answer: Can he, with the right support, study medicine? That assessment led to a landmark Supreme Court judgment — a rare beacon of inclusive justice — directing the National Medical Commission (NMC) to revise its outdated and discriminatory guidelines for MBBS admissions. But what came next — just last week — is a betrayal not just of that spirit, but of the law. The NMC's 'interim guidelines' came two days before the counselling deadline. Buried within them was a new clause: A self-declaration affidavit. It asks candidates with disabilities to legally affirm — on stamp paper — what they cannot do. Can they stand on one leg? Can they climb stairs unaided? The real question is: Why isn't the NMC reading the Constitution? I asked Om, the same young man whose courage moved the apex court to act, whether he could truthfully answer those questions. 'No,' he said. And he shouldn't have to. These questions are humiliating, ableist, and illegal. They punish you for not performing like a non-disabled body — even though the very idea of 'reasonable accommodation' is to remove barriers so people can perform. I assessed Om's functional competency. He uses a mobility scooter. I use callipers and crutches myself. Neither of us can bear weight on our affected limbs. Neither of us can climb stairs without help. But both of us made it through medicine. So what, exactly, is NMC trying to assess? The committee behind these guidelines clearly has no understanding of functional ability or of what the Supreme Court ordered. In its first meeting in February — on record in the Anmol v UOI case — the NMC agreed it was time to rename 'Disability Assessment Boards' to 'Ability Assessment Boards,' and to define what reasonable accommodations actually mean. None of that made it into the final document. Instead, the NMC waited till the Court went on summer recess and dropped this vague, ableist document without public consultation — just days before the counselling deadline. This delay has created chaos once again. A family from Odisha has been stuck in Delhi for over a week waiting for their son's assessment. In the South, students from Telangana and Andhra are being forced to travel across states to Kerala or Tamil Nadu. The Court had explicitly ordered one assessment centre per state. Clearly, the NMC wasn't listening. It also wasn't listening when the court mandated that these assessment boards must include doctors with disabilities, to train them and guard against ableist bias. That, too, never happened. So what we get are absurd rejections like the one from Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital in Tamil Nadu: 'Since the patient is wheelchair-bound, she cannot do coordinated activities of the lower limb. Not eligible.' Wheelchair-bound? Patient? This is not only inaccurate, it's insulting. The same state has a gastro-surgeon with polio performing liver transplants and a urologist doing surgeries using a standing wheelchair. The organisation Doctors with Disabilities: Agents of Change has multiple wheelchair-user (not patients) doctors thriving and flourishing. Perhaps the doctors rejecting these students should consult their own colleagues before making such statements — or, at the very least, read the Omkar Gond v UOI (2024) judgment. What makes this even more damning is that there's still no appellate body in place, even though the Court mandated one. That means these students — already exhausted, humiliated, and denied — have no path to appeal unless they somehow make it to the high court or the Supreme Court again. But how many can afford that? How many have the strength? It's clear now that neither the NMC nor DGHS has learned anything from the multiple rap-on-the-knuckle SC orders. They continue to deny disabled aspirants, recycling the same experts who wrote the guidelines the Court already struck down. The result? A process that is not just broken — it is cruel. This isn't just a policy failure. It is a systemic refusal to listen, to learn, to evolve. The experts with lived experience are the ones who navigate this reality every day. Until our institutions learn to value lived experience over outdated assumptions, the cycle of discrimination will continue — wrapped neatly in a sealed envelope, marked urgent, and delivered into the void where justice should have been. The writer is a medical doctor at University College of Medical sciences, Delhi, and SC SC-appointed expert in Om Rathod v DGHS and Anmol v UOI SC judgements. Views are personal

Supreme Court to Telangana Speaker: decide on disqualification of BRS MLAs who defected to Congress within 3 months
Supreme Court to Telangana Speaker: decide on disqualification of BRS MLAs who defected to Congress within 3 months

Indian Express

timean hour ago

  • Indian Express

Supreme Court to Telangana Speaker: decide on disqualification of BRS MLAs who defected to Congress within 3 months

The Supreme Court Thursday asked the Speaker of the Telangana Assembly to decide petitions seeking the disqualification of 10 Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) MLAs who had defected to the ruling Congress expeditiously and not later than three months. A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) B R Gavai and Justice A G Masih was hearing petitions filed by BRS leaders who sought a directive to Speaker Gaddam Prasad Kumar for timely action on disqualification proceedings. The BRS had initially moved the Telangana High Court, where a single-judge bench gave the Speaker four weeks to fix a schedule for hearing the disqualification petitions. On appeal by the Speaker, a division bench on November 22, 2024, set aside the single-judge order and asked the Speaker to decide the petitions in a reasonable time. Setting aside the Telangana High Court division bench's order, the Supreme Court said the very objective of the anti-defection law was to curb the evil of political defections, and the only purpose of entrusting the role of adjudication to the Speaker was to avoid delay and to ensure expeditious decision on disqualification petitions. The bench noted that the Speaker, in his capacity as Tribunal, in deciding disqualification petitions, does not enjoy any 'constitutional immunity'. It asked the Telangana Speaker not to allow the MLAs, against whom disqualification petitions have been filed, to protract the proceedings. The court said an adverse inference can be drawn against any MLA who attempts a delaying tactic. The ruling pointed out that the Speaker had not even issued notice on the petitions seeking disqualification for almost seven months and said, 'If we do not issue any directions, it will amount to allowing the Speaker to repeat the widely criticised situation of 'operation successful, patient dead'.' Noting the recurring instances of Speakers allegedly sitting on disqualification proceedings, the Supreme Court also asked the Parliament to review the present mechanism contemplated under the 10th Schedule of the Constitution. 'Though we do not possess any advisory jurisdiction, it is for the Parliament to consider whether the mechanism of entrusting the Speaker/Chairman (with) the important task of deciding the issue of disqualification on the ground of defection is serving the purpose of effectively combating political defections or not. If the very foundation of our democracy and the principles that sustain it are to be safeguarded, it is to be examined whether the present mechanism is sufficient or not. At the cost of repetition, we observe that it is for the Parliament to take a call on that,' the Supreme Court said. The BRS filed the disqualification petitions before the Telangana Assembly Speaker in March-April 2024. This was after Danam Nagender, Kadiyam Srihari, Tellam Venkat Rao, Pocharam Srinivas Reddy, Kale Yadaiah, M Sanjay Kumar, Krishnamohan Reddy, Mahipal Reddy, Prakash Goud, and Arekapudi Gandhi, who were originally elected on a BRS ticket in the 2023 Telangana Assembly elections, switched to the Congress.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store