Be Ruthless In Identifying Beneficiaries: Apex Court Says Retest In NEET-UG Needed If Leak Was Widespread

The Supreme Court, today, remarked that if the question paper was leaked in the National Entrance-cum-Eligibility Test-Under Graduate Exam, 2024 (NEET-UG, 2024) on social media or telegram channels, then it is widespread, the integrity of the exam has been affected and such beneficiaries of the leak will have to be identified ruthlessly. The Court remarked that a retest may be required if the leak was widespread.

The Court also directed the National Testing Agency( 'NTA') to answer various questions put forth in the hearing of the petitions alleging the malpractices and paper leaks in theNEET-UG, 2024.

Several petitions were filed against the NEET-UG, 2024 exam, including Alakh Pandey alias Physics Wallah, alleging several malpractices and paper leaks and seeking directions for cancellation of exams. During vacation, the notice was issued in several petitions and all the matters were tagged together seeking a reply from the National Testing Agency ('NTA').

The Bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra observed, "The Court would have to scrutinise on the basis of the data which has emerged on the record: 1. Whether a breach has been committed to the sanctity of the examination. 2. Whether the alleged breach has taken place at a systematic level. 3. Whether the breach is of a nature which has affected the integrity of the exam. 4. Whether it is possible to segregate the beneficiaries of the fraud from the untainted students...5. When the leak of the question papers first took place 6. The manner in which the question papers were leaked or disseminated. 7. The time duration between the occurrence of the leak and the actual conduct of the examination which took place..."

The Court further directed NTA to answer, inter alia, the following questions, "1.When the leak is alleged to have first taken place and the modality in which the leaked question papers were made available. 2. Steps which have been taken so far for the identification of the beneficiaries of the leak. 3. How the leak was disseminated, the investigating officer shall furnish a status report on the above aspects as well."

The Court also directed the CBI to file the status report of the FIRs filed in the matter.

Senior Advocate Narender Hooda appeared for the Petitioner and read out the List of Dates to the Court, "On 4th of May, the Telegram channel disclosed the question paper and says these are the answers...NTA issued a press release acknowledging the issue of incorrect distribution of question paper...There are two sets of question papers which were prepared by the NTA. One was the alternative which was to be used in contingency and was kept in the Canara Bank. This one which was to be used was kept in SBI. Here is what happened, they distributed the question paper by taking it from Canara Bank. And then they realized this is not the question paper to be used...So they took this paper back, and gave the one which was at SBI. All of this wasted time of students."

CJI asked, "Out of these 67, how many candidates were the beneficiaries of the award of the grace marks?... In 1563, 6 students got 720 out of 720?...You are saying that re-test is required? On what basis you are saying this?"

Hooda said, "There are 6 FIRs registered, Patna, Delhi, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Jharkhand and Maharashtra."

CJI asked, "So we can say that the fact that there was a leak of question paper is an admitted fact?"

Hooda informed that there is a 'gang' involved in Bihar Police's FIR. He said that the accused persons sold the PDF file, then printouts were taken from the wifi printer kept in the schools and groups of candidates were made to memorize the questions. "Bihar Police is talking of "groups of candidates", he emphasised.

CJI then asked the Counsel appearing for the NTA, "When was the question paper pulled out of the locker? When were they sent to the locker? Tell us the fixed time. How many students appeared? What was the specific time of the exam? How are the papers distributed abroad? Were they sent in the diplomatic bag? Were they sent by courier? When were the question papers sent to SBI and Canara Bank? We want to know when the question papers were prepared. After they were received by NTA, in whose custody they were preserved, and when did NTA send them to the SBI and Canara Bank in different cities? There is printing, which printing press? Get the details. When did you send these question papers to the printing press? What were the transportation arrangements made for sending them to the printing press?"

CJI remarked, "You know why we are asking this. If we come to the conclusion that the time lag between the leak and the exam was not wide then it militates against the re-examination and if the time gap is wide then it shows the leak was widespread. If the sanctity is affected then a retest has to happen and if the grain cannot be separated from the shaft, tainted from the untainted, then also re-test has to be ordered. But it has to be noted that re-exam for 24 lakh students is difficult. If we see that the leak was on social media then it is extremely widespread. If it is through telegram, whatsapp then it spreads like wildfire.. and we also have to see the balance with the time of leak like, if it was May 5 morning before students went for the exam."

He continued, "Somebody who has a question paper is not going to ask students to sit down and memorise them and give on the spot memorize them...how many chances are there that a student can memorize? There are two aspects to it. Therefore we have to have clarity on facts for us to understand whether this is so systematic that we must order a retest."

CJI remarks, "One thing is very clear there has been a leak."

SG replied, "Only in Patna."

CJI said, "Only in Patna or not, we will see...The sanctity of the examination has been breached...it is now compromised...there is no question about it...the nature of the leak is now what we have to see."

CJI further said to SG: "We need to know what steps have been taken by the NTA and the Government to identify the beneficiaries of the leaks. Because that we have to do...we have to be ruthless on identifying the beneficiaries."

CJI remarked, "The kind of technology we have today...and the Government of India has a cyber forensic unit at its disposal...Is it not possible for us to run through the use of experts, to bring some sense of confidence to the process?...There should be a multi-disciplinary committee consisting of the best experts, not necessarily only from the government. We are dealing with the most prestigious of educational admissions and every middle-class parent aspires their children to do medical or engineering."

CJI told the SG, "Please take instruction from the Government...can we not run this through a data analytics program...to the cyber forensic unit? You can contact the government...in the Ministry of Home Affairs, much better. We will appoint one nodal counsel...one consolidated submission not exceeding ten pages."

The NTA had filed a reply in the matter, stating that the candidates scoring full marks in the NEET-UG, 2024 was due to a reduction in the syllabus which was done to alleviate pressure. It also stated that the candidates involved in the alleged paper leak were very minuscule, therefore, cancelling the examination would be counterproductive.

The Union of India has also filed a reply and said that in the absence of any proof of a large-scale breach of confidentiality in the NEET-UG, 2024, it would be irrational to scrap the examination.

The Court will also hear the petitions seeking CBI and ED probe in the matter.

The Court, on June 20, 2024, had also stayed the proceedings in various petitions filed across Rajasthan, Calcutta, and Bombay High Courts.

The Court, on June 13, 2024, had allowed the recommendations by the UOI and NTA, to conduct a re-examination for the 1563 candidates who were given compensatory marks in the NEET-UG, 2024. The re-examination is likely to be held on June 25, 2024. A petition was filed by Jaripiti Kartheek under Article 32 of the Constitution raising a grievance regarding the grant of compensatory marks to 1563 candidates using a normalization formula where, at the examination centres, the candidates were given less than three hours twenty minutes to complete their exam.

On June 14, 2024, The Court had also issued notice in the petition filed by the NTA seeking a transfer of pending petitions before various High Courts alleging the malpractices in NEET-UG. The Court tagged the matter and listed it on July 8, 2024. Other transfer petitions filed by NTA were withdrawn as they were related to the grant of compensatory marks, which has already been decided by the Court on June 13, 2024.

The Allahabad High Court had also dismissed the writ petition filed by Ayushi Patel, an aspirant who appeared for the exam and had found that she produced forged and manipulated documents. The Court also observed that it cannot restrain the authorities from taking any legal action against the Petitioner in accordance with law for producing forged and fictitious documents.

Accordingly, the Court directed NTA and Union of India to file their answers on Wednesday i.e. July 10, 2024, and listed the matter on Thursday i.e. July 11, 2024.

Cause Title: Vanshika Yadav v. Union of India & Ors. (W.P.(C) No. 335/2024) and connected matters.