SC Directs NTA to Publish Centre-wise Marks of May 5 NEET-UG Exams for Transparency
Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, July 18: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to publish the scores of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for Undergraduate candidates (NEET-UG) exam but without disclosing the identity of the students by 12 p.m. on July 20 in order to bring about transparency.
In its order, the court instructed the central agency to publish the marks scored by the aspirants on their website city-wise and centre-wise masking the identity of the candidates. Sources in the NTA, however, said the agency was preparing to publish the results in keeping with the SC’s order by 5 PM on Friday.
With the counselling for undergraduate medical courses scheduled to begin from July 24, the top court refrained from committing to an oral plea by some petitioners to stay the process. A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud, also comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra has posted the next hearing on July 22.
“What is happening is the fact that there is a leak at Patna and Hazaribagh is admitted..the question papers had been disseminated. We want to ensure whether this was confined to those centres or widespread. Students are handicapped because they don’t know the results. We want the student’s identity to be masked but let us see centre-wise what was the mark pattern,” the CJI said.
While listing the matter for July 22, the CJI said the student’s identities must be masked. “You can have dummy roll numbers, so no student’s identity is disclosed. But let us see, centre-wise, what was the mark pattern.” The Supreme Court delivered its order as it is hearing a batch of pleas in connection with the NEET-UG 2024 paper leak case on Thursday.
Earlier, the Bench had underscored the fact that the sanctity of the exam was compromised was “beyond question.” It however, maintained that the decision to cancel the exam in its entirety would be an “extreme last resort” as it affected the lives of over 23 lakh students.
More than 23.33 lakh students had taken the test on May 5 at 4,750 centres in 571 cities, including in 14 cities overseas. The Centre and the NTA, in their earlier affidavits filed before the apex Court, had said the scrapping of the examinations in entirety would be counter-productive and “seriously jeopardise” lakhs of honest candidates in the absence of any proof of large-scale breach of confidentiality.
Meanwhile, the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) has issued a notice urging medical colleges to enter their seats on its official portal. The committee will be accepting the seat details from July 20 from the participating institutions for UG counselling 2024 on the MCC portal.
Citing a conflict of interest arising from the director of IIT Madras’s membership in the NTA’s governing board, the Advocate for the petitioners Narender Hooda claimed that the data analysis report from the institute could not be trusted. As many as 131 students are asking for a retest, while 254 are opposed, according to the Solicitor General.
Meanwhile, the investigation into the alleged irregularities in the NEET-UG examination continues as the CBI questioned four AIIMS Patna students on Thursday, officials said. They said three MBBS third-year students and one from the second year were taken to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) office for questioning in connection with the case.
They were picked up from their hostel rooms in the presence of senior faculty members, who had been informed that the students were needed for the probe, the officials said.
The CJI has sought information from the NTA on the number of students who changed exam cities and who made it to the top 1.08 lakh and whether there is a bias in favour of those who registered on April 9 and 10, in light of the allegations of mark inflation and paper leaks.
The court also sought reports from Bihar; state police filed the first case in this matter, which has since been linked to a national ‘solver gang’ active in Jharkhand, Gujarat, Delhi, and Maharashtra.
The court’s order followed a day of intense arguments over a clutch of petitions seeking a repeat, or cancellation, of the qualifying examination for undergraduate medical courses in the country.
The order to publish scores followed a plea by the petitioners. They argued that making the scores public would increase public confidence in the NTA. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the exam agency, opposed the request on grounds the test results were students’ private property.
“Entire results are never published… they are the personal property of students,” Mr Mehta reasoned, but the court seemed unimpressed, stating, “We order the NTA to publish marks obtained by students in NEET-UG 2024 exam, while ensuring the identity of each student is masked.” The order to breakdown these results by city and centre was also opposed by the NTA.
The three-member bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud overruled this point too. “…the fact is there was a leak in Patna (in Bihar) and Hazaribagh (in Jharkhand). Question papers were disseminated. We want to find out if this was confined to those centres or widespread…”
Earlier in the day, Mr Mehta and Mr Hooda exchanged complex arguments on the alleged paper leak, and protocol for transfer of the exam papers from printing centre to exam halls, and the IIT Madras report on distribution of marks.
The NTA told the court IIT Madras’ report showed mark distribution followed a bell-shaped curve normal to any large-scale examination, and indicated no abnormality. Mr Hooda, however, argued it would be difficult to establish variances given a data set as large as all students, i.e., nearly 24 lakh.
The report also acknowledged the “overall increase in marks obtained… specifically in the range of 550 to 720 across cities and centres”, but attributed this to changes in the exam syllabus.
Earlier the court stressed it would only order a re-test if the “sanctity” of the May 5 exam was “lost on a large scale” as a result of leaked questions. The remark was an echo of observations made last week, when the court said the “sanctity” of the exam had been affected and demanded answers. The court then, however, had advised against a re-test, saying certain circumstances would argue against it.
“You (the petitioners) have to show us the leak was systematic… it affected the entire exam… so as to warrant cancellation of the entire exam…” the CJI had remarked in the morning, “because of 23 lakh students only one lakh will get admission… we cannot order re-test.”
“If we accept your wider submission (that leaked question papers compromised the exam results) we would also like your assistance on the lines on which the investigation must happen.” The court said it was unfeasible to identify and “segregate” students who may have conspired to access questions.
