India is a continent masquerading as a country, the United Kingdom-based The Economist wrote. This was clear to the Congress during the freedom struggle, when it organised its local committees by language. And post-Independence, languages were given their own states. For a country as large as India, recognising that sub-national language communities needed space was crucial – its twin Pakistan, which did not learn this reality, was torn asunder in the third decade of its existence. Thus, in 1947, it was clear that education, intrinsic to culture, would be handled by the states. It took the lawlessness of Emergency to break this common sense consensus. In 1975, Indira Gandhi declared Emergency, a period during which civil liberties were curbed, the press censored and political rivals jailed. In 1976, with the Indian democracy shut down, the prime minister clandestinely transferred education from the state list to the concurrent list. While the former gives state Assemblies full jurisdiction over a subject, the concurrent list allows both Parliament and the states to pass laws. In case of a clash, the Union law overrules the state law.
Shoaib Daniyal, 'The NEET fiasco makes it clear that states must be at the core of framing India’s education policy', Scroll.in