Modi and Shah Must Explain Why a Medical College in Jammu and Kashmir Became a Political Target
A government medical college in Jammu and Kashmir followed the rules, applied NEET merit, respected domicile quotas, and admitted students through a nationally approved counselling process. Yet it still became the centre of protests, political pressure, and regulatory action. That alone raises a serious question. Why did education become collateral damage in a political contest that had nothing to do with admissions and everything to do with optics?
Background: What the College and the Law Actually Say
The Shri Mata Vaishno Devi medical college in Reasi is a government institution governed by the same laws as every other medical college in India. Admissions were conducted through NEET, a national entrance exam designed to eliminate bias, discretion, and political interference. Like every state and union territory, Jammu and Kashmir applies an 85 percent domicile quota. That system exists in BJP-ruled states, Congress-ruled states, and everywhere in between. There is nothing exceptional or controversial about it.
What Happened on the Ground
The admissions reflected local demographics. That is how domicile quotas work. No rule was violated. No illegal reservation was applied. No religious filter exists in NEET or in counselling software. Importantly, no serious legal challenge was raised against the admissions process itself. The problem began only after the outcome did not align with political expectations.
From Admissions to Agitation
Once the student composition became public, the conversation shifted. Not to merit. Not to law. But to sentiment. The college’s name, associated with a major Hindu shrine, was turned into a political trigger. Suddenly, a secular government institution was expected to deliver a culturally curated outcome. That expectation has no constitutional basis, but it was allowed to dominate the narrative.
The BJP’s Central Contradiction
The Bharatiya Janata Party has been the loudest champion of NEET. It has defended national exams as instruments of merit, fairness, and transparency. It has argued against local discretion and political interference in admissions. Yet in this case, BJP-linked groups led protests against an outcome produced by the very system the party endorses. That contradiction was never addressed honestly.
Silence from Modi and Shah
This is where accountability matters. Narendra Modi has repeatedly spoken about meritocracy, competitive exams, and equal opportunity. Amit Shah is the constitutional authority responsible for Jammu and Kashmir. Neither offered a clear public defence of the admission process. Neither stated plainly that religion has no place in medical education. That silence allowed street pressure to replace clarity.
How Institutions Absorbed Political Pressure
When the National Medical Commission withdrew approval citing deficiencies, the narrative conveniently shifted from politics to paperwork. Even if deficiencies existed, the timing mattered. The inspection followed agitation, not the other way around. The effect was to sanitise a political outcome with technical language, while students paid the price.
Students as Collateral Damage
Those admitted students cleared NEET. They followed counselling rules. They trusted the system. In return, they got uncertainty, stigma, and forced relocation. This is the worst signal a country can send to its aspirants. That merit is valid only until it becomes politically inconvenient.
A Dangerous Precedent
If political mobilisation can overturn admissions today, it can target any institution tomorrow. A new college. A remote location. A sensitive region. This is how institutional credibility erodes. Not through one dramatic decision, but through repeated surrender to pressure.
What Modi and Shah Must Answer
Is NEET the final authority or merely a suggestion? Does domicile quota mean merit among locals or political discretion over outcomes? Will the central leadership defend students when rules are followed but sentiments are offended?
Conclusion
Education cannot be governed by symbolism, crowd pressure, or selective outrage. A medical college is not a political battleground. Modi and Shah owe the country a clear statement. Either India stands by merit, law, and constitutional neutrality, or it quietly accepts that even education is now negotiable in the face of political discomfort.
