NEET UG 2024: A re-test or not, the extent of the leak are some of the issues SC will examine on July 11

Supreme Court on NEET

Around 24 lakh students seeking a career in medicine will on July 11 closely follow the proceedings of the Supreme Court when it resumes hearing a bunch of petitions seeking the scrapping of this year’s NEET and a re-test.

On July 8, a bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said the sanctity of this year’s National Eligibility cum Entrance Test had been compromised and there was little doubt that the paper leaked.

This year’s NEET-UG has been hit by a series of irregularities ranging from allegations of paper leak, an eye-brow-raising number of perfect scores and an award of grace marks, which was later scrapped.

As many as 24 lakh students sat the exam this year for admission to MBBS, BDS, AYUSH and other related courses, with 1.08 lakh seats on offer.

The Supreme Court has said if the question paper was leaked and shared widely on social media platforms such as Telegram and WhatsApp, it would have to order a retest.

The court asked the National Testing Authority (NTA), tasked with conducting NEET, for the following details:

1) When was the question paper leaked?

2) The manner of the leak and how the paper was shared?

3) The time between the leak and the conduct of the examination. The idea is to understand if the students had enough time to get the correct answers.

The court also asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to submit a status report on the probe and what it has found, so far.

The controversy over NEET has led to a political slugfest, with the opposition accusing the government of failing to ensure fair and free tests.

What does the Supreme Court plan to assess?

CJI Chandrachud has said cancelling the examination and a re-test would be the last resort, as the decision would affect 24 lakh students. It would not be fair to order a re-test for all the students, many of whom come from poor families and would struggle to pay for travel, if the leak is not widespread.

NEET was conducted at 4,750 centres spread across 511 cities and 14 centres abroad.

If it finds that the leak is widespread, the court may order a retest. Before arriving at the decision, it will ask the CBI and the NTA if they have been able to track the beneficiaries of the leak

The court has asked the NTA and the Centre to examine if data analytics could help identify suspect cases. Essentially, it has asked the government to check on the past performance of the candidate to see if their test score is unusually high. The court has asked the government to take a call on the counselling for medical seats.

What does the law say?

Justice Chandrachud in 2021 passed the most recent judgment on the sanctity of selection process when he heard the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) exam case.

Between June 2014 and July 2015, DSSSB conducted a recruitment process to fill 231 head clerk vacancies in the Delhi government’s services department.

DSSSB received several complaints alleging serious irregularities, including candidate impersonation and paper leak, in both tiers of the recruitment process.

In September 2015, a committee set up by the Delhi government found irregularities in the process. DSSSB, too, said the process was compromised. The deputy chief minister issued a notification cancelling the test.

Some candidates challenged the order in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which set aside the deputy CM’s notification. The Delhi High Court upheld CAT’s order.

The Supreme Court said, “Where the entire process is found to be flawed, its cancellation may undoubtedly cause hardship to a few who may not specifically be found to be involved in wrong-doing. But that is not sufficient to nullify the ultimate decision to cancel an examination where the nature of the wrong-doing cuts through the entire process to seriously impinge upon the legitimacy of the examinations which have been held for recruitment.”

It also said as long as there was sufficient basis to contend that mass-scale irregularities occurred, the court need not indulge in hearing possible explanations and alternative scenarios where such irregularities would be justified.

“The precedents of this court sufficiently demonstrate that when the credibility of an entire examination stands vitiated by systemic irregularities, the issue then is not about seeking to identify the candidates who are tainted,” the court ruled, upholding the notification cancelling the examinations.

Previous SC judgments

In 1998, the High Court set aside the decision of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal to cancel the entire examination after a report claimed mass copying by students.

Setting aside the high court order, the Supreme Court said, “In such a situation the board is left with no alternative but to cancel the examination. It is extremely difficult for the board to identify innocent students from those indulging in malpractices. One may feel sorry for the innocent students but one has to appreciate the situation in which the board was placed and the alternatives that were available to it so far as this examination was concerned.”

In 2019, the Teachers Recruitment Board in Tamil Nadu invited applications for posts of lecturers in government polytechnic colleges. The written exam was objective type and candidates were required to fill up OMR sheets. There were allegations of large-scale malpractices involving tampering with the OMR sheets.

After discrepancies were found in the entries of 196 candidates, the board ordered a retest.

The high court, however, held that only those who benefited from malpractices should take the re-test but the Supreme Court set aside the order. “A bona fide decision taken by the Board to instil confidence in the public regarding the integrity of the selection process could not have been interfered with by the High Court.”