Union Cabinet approves ordinance to keep state boards out of NEET ambit for one year

Union Cabinet has approved promulgation of an ordinance to keep state boards out of the ambit of common medical entrance exams i.e. National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) for one year. 

Through the ordinance, the order of the Supreme Court on NEET will be put on hold for a year i.e. for the academic year 2016-2017.

Background 

Earlier in May 2016, Supreme Court had refused to modify its April 2016 order making NEET mandatory for admission to undergraduate medical courses across the country for one year. 

The apex court order had implied that all government colleges, deemed universities and private medical colleges would be covered under NEET. It also had scrapped all those examinations which had already taken place or were slated to be conducted separately. 

Several State governments and major political parties had favoured deferring implementation of the apex court verdict. Several State governments also wanted their exams to be the basis for admission for their 85 per cent quota for the academic year 2016-2017. 

So far, as per the SC order 6.5 lakh students have already sat for the first phase of NEET held on 1 May 2016. The next phase of the exam was scheduled on 24 July 2016.

Supreme Court set aside the Delhi High Court Order on sanction of Prosecution in 2G Case

 The Supreme Court on 31 January 2012 set aside the Delhi High Court order refusing to pass any direction to the Prime Minister for taking a decision on sanction of prosecution in 2G case. The Supreme Court held that filing of a complaint under the Prevention of Corruption Act is a constitutional right of a citizen. It said the competent authority should take a decision on giving the sanction within a time frame. In a case filed by Janata Party Chief Subramanian Swamy, seeking a direction to the Prime Minister for sanction to prosecute the then Telecom Minister A Raja, the two judge bench of the Apex Court held that if the sanction is not given within four months it would deem to have been granted. The bench comprising justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly held that Swamy had the locus standi to seek sanction for Raja's prosecution. The court, however, said, it was not declaring as ultra vires, the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Supreme Court set aside the Delhi High Court Order on sanction of Prosecution in 2G Case CURRENT AFFAIRS IV

The Supreme Court on 31 January 2012 set aside the Delhi High Court order refusing to pass any direction to the Prime Minister for taking a decision on sanction of prosecution in 2G case. The Supreme Court held that filing of a complaint under the Prevention of Corruption Act is a constitutional right of a citizen. It said the competent authority should take a decision on giving the sanction within a time frame. In a case filed by Janata Party Chief Subramanian Swamy, seeking a direction to the Prime Minister for sanction to prosecute the then Telecom Minister A Raja, the two judge bench of the Apex Court held that if the sanction is not given within four months it would deem to have been granted. The bench comprising justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly held that Swamy had the locus standi to seek sanction for Raja's prosecution. The court, however, said, it was not declaring as ultra vires, the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.