Chennai: Madras High Court in an interim order on Tuesday directed the Director of Medical Education, to clarify the status of facilities to be provided for higher education for a child of Sri Lanka's Tamil refugees, born in India.
The first bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M Sathyanarayanan stated this on a PIL by advocate R Sri Priya, based on a news report in an English daily. The petitioner sought a direction to the Dean, Government Kilpauk Medical college, Chennai, to reserve one MBBS seat to Nandini, whose application was refused solely on the ground that she is the daughter of a Sri Lankan refugee.
The court, in its interim order, sought a clarification if any benefit was to be given to wards of Tamil Refugees or not. Sri Priya said that the girl's parents from Jaffna in Sri Lanka came to Tamil Nadu as refugees in 1990 and settled down at the refugee camp at Arachalur in Erode District. Nandini passed the matriculation exam with flying colours, applied for admission to MBBS course in Government Kilpauk Medical College and was called for counselling. However her candidature was rejected on the sole ground she is a Sri Lankan refugee.
The petitioner submitted that the case was a 'classic example' of how the state seeks to override the human rights guaranteed to refugees under the Constitution, as well as the International Convention Relating to Status of refugees. Sri Priya pointed out that the Tamil Nadu government has consistently stood up for the rights of Lankan Tamils by espousing their rights and exposing alleged large-scale human rights violation in the island nation.
The Joint Secretary, Health and family Welfare Department, in his counter, submitted that the application was made in the Open Category, the cut off marks for which were 198.25 for 2014-15 academic year whereas the girl had got only 197.5. So her application would not have come for consideration. The counter further said Sri Lankan refugees have been deleted from certain Special categories, based on the November 1 2002 judgement of Madras High Court.
The bench said "We are unable to clearly understand the defense taken up by the authorities in as much as they have to clarify what could be the status of such a child of Tamil refugees, who happen to be born in India...whether any benefit at all is to be given to wards of Tamil refugee or not."
The bench pointed out that despite this, the student had excelled in studies and sought to know if she was to be considered as eligible for 85 per cent of seats meant for state quota as a general Candidate or even that is sought to be denied to her.
The bench said the affidavit clarifying the position should be filed within two weeks and posted the matter to September 19.
Comments
0 comment