On Thursday(18th July),The Supreme Court heard petitions seeking a re-test or cancellation of the 2024 NEET-UG exam due to an alleged paper leak. The NTA claimed the leak occurred just 45 minutes before the exam at certain centres.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: On Thursday(18th July), the Supreme Court heard multiple petitions seeking a re-test or the cancellation of the 2024 NEET-UG exam. The petitions were filed in response to the alleged paper leak that occurred before the exam, raising significant concerns about the stance of the Centre and the National Testing Agency (NTA). The NTA, responsible for conducting this nationwide medical entrance exam, claimed that the paper leak happened only about 45 minutes before the start of the exam in certain centres.
The 2024 NEET-UG exam, held on May 5, saw the participation of nearly 24 lakh aspiring medical professionals. However, the results have been mired in controversy due to allegations of leaked question papers and the incorrect awarding of ‘grace marks.’
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the NTA, presented findings from the CBI investigation. According to the investigation, at a specific centre in Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, an unauthorized individual took photographs of the question papers between 8 AM and 9:20 AM on the day of the exam. The CBI has been assigned to investigate this case further.
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, leading the bench, expressed skepticism about whether all 180 questions could have been solved within the 45-minute window before the examination commenced at 10:15 AM. Solicitor General Mehta responded that the gang responsible for the breach consisted of seven individuals who divided the questions among themselves.
“Whole hypothesis that that a breach occurred within 45 minutes and the entire paper was solved and distributed to students seems highly improbable.”
-Chief Justice Chandrachud said.
These leaked question papers were then solved, and students who allegedly paid the gang received the answers to memorize.
ALSO READ:NEET-UG Paper Leak| CBI Arrests Four AIIMS Patna Students Involved in ‘Solver Module’
At the beginning of the session, the bench, which also included Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, emphasized the urgency of addressing these petitions over other cases due to their “social ramifications” and the fact that lakhs of students are awaiting the outcome.
After a day of extensive arguments, the court scheduled the next hearing for July 22.
The Supreme Court heard arguments concerning the alleged systemic failures in the NEET-UG 2024 examination process, with senior advocate Narender Hooda representing some of the petitioners. Hooda ardently called for the cancellation of the NEET-UG 2024, citing a “systemic failure in holding it.” He alleged that the integrity of the examination was compromised due to the mishandling of question papers.
According to Hooda, the question papers were in the custody of a private courier company for six days in Hazaribagh, during which they were transported via an e-rickshaw to an examination center. The principal of this center was later arrested for alleged involvement in the scandal.
In contrast, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta dismissed any claims of a NEET-UG 2024 paper leak. He emphasized that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had thoroughly investigated the logistics “from printer to center.”
Mehta detailed the security measures, saying-
“Questions arise about how the sealing and GPS tracking were managed, considering the seven-layer security system in place.”
to assure the court of the robustness of the process.
The court posed a direct question to Mr. Mehta:
“Mr. Solicitor, did you use a private courier company to deliver the NEET papers?”
Mr. Mehta chose to defer his response to a later time, leaving this critical question unanswered for the moment.
Questions Arise Over NEET Paper Transportation
The controversy over the transportation of NEET question papers gained traction after the CBI suggested a possible leak during transit. This suspicion arose after examining the process of moving the papers to the examination centers or after their arrival at a particular school in Hazaribagh. The Supreme Court indicated it would only consider ordering a re-test for NEET-UG 2024 if it was established that the “sanctity” of the May 5 exam was “lost on a large scale as a result of leaked questions.”
This stance mirrored the court’s observations from the previous week, where it noted that the “sanctity” of the exam had indeed been affected and demanded comprehensive answers. However, the court had advised against a re-test unless compelling evidence showed widespread impact.
Chief Justice Chandrachud highlighted the necessity for concrete evidence, stating-
“You need to demonstrate that the leak was systematic and impacted the entire examination to justify canceling it.”
When Mr. Hooda informed the court that approximately 23.33 lakh students took the exam for around 1.08 lakh seats in both government and private medical colleges, the bench responded-
“Even though only 1.08 lakh out of 23.33 lakh students will be admitted, we cannot order a re-test without concrete evidence that the entire exam was compromised.”
The NEET-UG 2024 controversy erupted last month following allegations that the question paper had been leaked. Investigations suggested the leak was orchestrated by a national ‘solver gang’ network, as evidenced by unusually high scores posted on social media. An unprecedented 67 students, including six from a single coaching center, achieved perfect scores of 720, raising further suspicions.
Additionally, questions were raised about the awarding of ‘grace marks’ to 1,563 students, a practice that was not part of the exam protocol according to the authorities.
In an affidavit filed last week, the government, referencing an analysis by IIT Madras, insisted there was no indication of “mass malpractice nor evidence that some candidates had benefitted from cheating.” The analysis aimed to dispel concerns and assure that the integrity of the examination process remained intact.
