The court held that although the right to pursue higher or professional education is not explicitly spelt out as a fundamental right in the Constitution, it is an affirmative obligation on the part of the State to ensure this right. Representational image.
Right to pursue higher education can't be curtailed lightly: Delhi HC
The case dealt with a student whose admission to a medical college was cancelled over allegations of him being involved in irregularities in the NEET-UG 2024; the CBI clarified that he was not an accused but a witness
The Delhi High Court has ruled that although the right to pursue higher or professional education doesn’t come under a fundamental right in the Constitution, it is not something that can be curtailed lightly, and there is an affirmative obligation on the State to ensure it.
On January 7, Justice Jasmeet Singh held that, “The right to pursue higher or professional education, even though not explicitly spelt out as a fundamental right in part III of the Constitution of India, is an affirmative obligation on the part of the state to ensure this right, and the same cannot be permitted to be curtailed lightly.”
Also read: CBI unearths scam to 'manipulate' NEET UG scores; two arrested
This observation was made during a case that dealt with a student whose admission to a medical college was cancelled over allegations of him being involved in irregularities in the NEET-UG 2024.
Petitioner’s plea
The Court allowed a plea filed by a candidate, Harshit Agrawal, who attended the NEET-UG, 2024 examination held on May 5, 2024.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) issued a summons for Agrawal to appear for investigation in connection with alleged NEET-UG 2024 examination irregularities. The respondent National Testing Agency (NTA) had issued a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner, to which he duly replied.
Also read: Medical panel sits on crores in refund to NEET-SS students for months
However, the NTA then withdrew Agrawal’s NEET-UG 2024 scorecard, following which the admission of the petitioner was cancelled by the Bhima Bhoi Medical College and Hospital in Balangir, Odisha in which he had obtained admission.
The plea sought directions from the NTA to let Agrawal attend his MBBS classes, and to issue an order in his favour, similar to that given to a fellow candidate later allowed to attend her MBBS classes, who was also included in the same list of students terminated from the MBBS course along with him.
No evidence of malpractice
The CBI said that it was investigating allegations of leakage of the NEET-UG 2024 question paper. It said that although it had identified 22 candidates for their involvement in various malpractices, the petitioner was not an accused in the chargesheet but a witness.
Also read: Parliamentary panel slams NTA's performance, suggests corrective measures
In view of the stand taken by the CBI, the court held that the petitioner was not one of the accused but was only a witness in the criminal case being probed by the agency in relation to the alleged irregularities. Therefore, there could not be any prima facie findings of him committing any malpractice.
'Right to education needs to be protected'
The court then said, “The valuable right accrued to the petitioner by clearing the entrance exam, i.e. NEET-UG needs to be protected, as the action of cancellation of admission and removal of the name of the petitioner from the MBBS course is disrupting the academic progress of the petitioner on totally unjustifiable grounds.”
The Bench then issued a Mandamus to the respondent (NTA), passing the order for it to permit the petitioner to continue his MBBS classes.
(With agency inputs)