Manner In Which NTA Organised NEET-UG 2024 Gives Rise To "Serious Concerns": Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, while pronouncing the judgment in the petitions alleging paper leaks in the National Entrance-cum-Eligibility Test-Under Graduate Exam, 2024 ('NEET-UG, 2024'), observed that the manner in which the National Testing Agency ('NTA') has organised the exam this year gives rise to serious concerns.
The Court also observed that there was no systemic breach of the sanctity of the exam and the leak was only limited to Patna and Hazaribagh. On July 23, 2024, the Court refused to cancel the NEET-UG, 2024 and said that cancellation would not be justified.
The Bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra held, "While the various issues discussed until now do not lead to the conclusion that the integrity of the NEET was vitiated at a systemic level, the manner in which NTA has organised the exam this year gives rise to serious concerns. The Court is cognizant of the fact that national-level exams with participation from tens of lakhs of students require immense resources, coordination, and planning. But that is precisely the reason for the existence of a body such as NTA. It is no excuse to say that the exam is conducted in myriad centres or that a large number of aspirants appear for the exam. NTA has sufficient resources at its disposal. It has adequate funding, time, and opportunities to organise exams such as the NEET without lapses of the kind that occurred this year."
Reference was made to multiple occurrences in the conduct of the exam which prompted the Court to make these observations. The Court said that in at least twelve centres, the question paper stored in Canara Bank was wrongly distributed to the candidates and the question paper which should have been distributed was the one stored in SBI. It said that in many centres, aspirants completed the incorrect question paper and were ultimately evaluated while in others, the relevant authorities realised the mistake and then distributed the correct question paper.
"This either indicates that the city coordinators were irresponsible and not fit for duty or that the information as to which question paper was to be distributed to candidates was not properly communicated to them. Certainly, neither Canara Bank nor SBI appear to have been notified as to whether the papers in their custody were to be released. As long as the city coordinators furnished proof of authorisation, the papers were released without question. The custodian banks have to be informed as to whether they should release the question papers in their possession. Had the custodian banks been informed whether or not to release the papers in their possession, the city coordinators would have been unable to collect the incorrect set of question papers, even if they made an honest mistake. NTA must consider the various possibilities and plan the protocol to be followed after careful consideration.", the Court added.
Further, the Court said that the paper was leaked in Patna and Hazaribagh and one of the centres, the rear door of the strongroom was opened and unauthorised persons were permitted to access the question papers, which indicated that there was a serious lapse in security and that security measures, which are stringent and effective, must be implemented by NTA.
The Court observed, "Another point of concern is that NTA relies on persons over whom it does not exercise direct oversight to be the invigilators for the exam. There are various methods which may be adopted to ensure appropriate oversight over invigilators and decrease the likelihood of the use of unfair means. All of these issues indicate that the security protocols must be tightened to decrease the possibility of malpractice and fraud and to lessen access by private persons to the question papers."
Another aspect which was dealt with by the Court concerned the 1563 candidates who were initially awarded compensatory marks. "As noticed above, a committee constituted by NTA first recommended that the compensatory marks be awarded. However, as the controversy surrounding the award of these marks became more prominent, a second committee was constituted. This committee recommended the cancellation of compensatory marks and the conduct of a re-exam in their place for those students. A body such as NTA which is entrusted with immense responsibility in relation to highly important competitive exams cannot afford to misstep, take an incorrect decision, and amend it at a later stage. All decisions must be well-considered, with due regard to the importance of the decision. Flip-flops are an anathema to fairness.", the Court said.
The Court directed the NTA to ensure that all the concerns highlighted in the judgment are addressed and the committee constituted by the Union Government was also requested to keep these issues in mind while formulating its recommendations. The Union Government has constituted a seven-member expert committee, chaired by Dr K Radhakrishnan, former Chairman of ISRO.
Cause Title: Vanshika Yadav v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 568)
Click here to read/download the Judgment