The National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET UG) was recently the target of a controversy due to the allegedly non-compliant conduct. Consequently, several rallies all over the country took place.
Amid the storm, the NTA was absolutely convincing about their integrity and security centricity. The NTA CLP position was unyielding and the authority, without any changes, was sticking to its ‘do not leak’ position. This blog will be developed to the core of this case, which are the NTA argumentation, and the Supreme Court’s observations.
There is a lot of important events including the Supreme Court hearing on the alleged NEET paper leak, as well as the ICAI’s (Institute of Chartered Accountants of India) announcement of revised dates for CA exam results.
The article entitled “Petitions filed in the leak case of NEET UG paper to be heard in the Supreme Court today” is written by the Supreme Court. This will be 43 petitions that the Supreme Court will listen to of papers that leaked during the NEET exam next Thursday, according to information released. The judge had earlier asked NTA and the Government of India to provide comprehensive affidavits, and got a status update from the CBI concerning the NEET UG exam by the deadline,
The Allegations
The first reports of the alleged paper leak emerged from Patna, Bihar, triggering a major investigation. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) took up the case and arrested eight individuals in connection with the alleged irregularities. These arrests fueled protests and demands for transparency and justice from students and parents nationwide.
In response to the allegations, the NTA submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court. The affidavit stated that after thorough examination of reports from city coordinators, centre superintendents, and supervisors, no question papers were found missing, and no locks were broken. Each question paper had a unique serial number assigned to a specific candidate, ensuring traceability.
The NTA also emphasized that CCTV footage was constantly monitored and showed no signs of any untoward incident or paper leak. The agency maintained that the sanctity of the examination process was intact.
Supreme Court's Stand
Despite the NTA’s assurances, the Supreme Court expressed concerns about the integrity of the examination. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Mishra noted that there appeared to be a leak. The Court emphasized the need to identify the extent of the leak and the beneficiaries before deciding on ordering a re-examination, which could affect lakhs of students.
Incident in Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan
Another incident of alleged irregularity occurred in Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. On the day of the exam, the wrong medium of question paper was distributed, leading to protests by some candidates who left the centre without taking the exam. This incident sparked rumors of a paper leak on social media. However, the NTA clarified that this situation did not lead to a leak and that the re-examination at the centre was conducted smoothly on the same day.
Centre's Stand and Data Analysis
The Centre, represented by the government, also presented its findings to the Supreme Court. It stated that there was no indication of “large-scale manipulation” or any local group of candidates being favored. An extensive data analysis of NEET-UG 2024 results by IIT Madras supported this claim. The analysis revealed a bell-shaped distribution of marks, typical of any large-scale examination, indicating no abnormalities.
Neet UG Conclusion
The NEET-UG paper leak controversy remains a contentious issue, with the NTA and the government asserting that no leak occurred, while the Supreme Court remains cautious. The final decision on whether a re-examination is necessary will depend on further investigations and the identification of any irregularities. For now, students and stakeholders await a resolution that upholds the integrity of the examination process.
This case highlights the critical importance of transparency and security in large-scale examinations. As the investigation continues, it serves as a reminder of the need for robust measures to maintain the sanctity of such crucial assessments.
