chennai the madras high court on tuesday wondered as to whether the 42nd amendment made to the constitution transferring education from the state list to concurrent list would amount to tinkering the basic structure of the constitutionthe first bench of chief justice sanjib banerjee and justice p d audikesavalu made the observation while admitting a plea moved by aram seyya virumbu trust represented by dr ezhilan naganathan who is also the dmk mla in thousand lights constituencythe plea challenged the constitutional validity of the amendment if the trust succeeds in its plea the state would be able to do away with the national eligibility cum entrance test neet and the national education policy nepone can respect the sentiments of the petitioner but at the same time please remember we have vast parts of this country where they continue to be kind of underdeveloped without the resources that other places have the court saidvast number of places do not have medical institutions why should the aspirations of students in certain states where there are no medical colleges remain unfulfilled just because the state does not have a medical college the court addedso therefore there has to be a certain amount to equitable distribution of the educational resources or making it available to students from places where it may not be so readily available the judges saidthey added that even though the matter is taken away from one list to another there is no kind of complete takeover of the subject as sucheven now unfortunately we dont consider people from northeast as mainstream indians which is a tragedy because of their looks we call them nepalese or chinese but they are also as much indian as you and i the court saidthey come from places where such infrastructures are not available so we must consider all of them the court added and directed the union government to respond to the plea in eight weeksthe court then suo motu impleaded the tamil nadu government as a party respondent and directed the state to report its viewsaccording to the petitioner section 57 of the constitution violates the basic structure doctrine for the reason that the said amendment has resulted in upsetting the federal structure as originally envisaged by the constitution framersby virtue of transferring the subject of education from list ii to list iii the states executivelegislative autonomy in the matters of education has become subservient to unions executivelegislative powers the petitioner said