The Supreme Court of India recently postponed the hearing of a petition challenging the transparency of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance (NEET)-PG 2024 examination.
The hearing, initially scheduled for Friday, was deferred due to the non-sitting of the bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud. The case is now expected to be listed for hearing after the apex court reopens following the Dussehra holiday.
The petition, represented by senior advocate Vibha Datta Makhija, raises serious concerns about the conduct of the NEET-PG examination. The petitioners, who are aspirants of the NEET-PG exam, argue that the introduction of two shifts, a new normalisation method, and a change in the tie-breaker criterion just three days before the examination has adversely affected the students. The NEET-PG exam, conducted by the National Board of Examinations (NBE) on August 11, announced its results on August 23. The petitioners contend that the NEET-PG information bulletin could be amended at the whims and fancy of the authorities and no rules or regulations existed governing the conduct of examinations.
The petition further challenges the NBE's practice of not disclosing question papers, answer keys, or response sheets of candidates for the exam this year. The petitioners argue that there was a clear lack of transparency in the conduct of the examination since none of the documents allowed students to check their performance. They further highlight that unlike previous years where the candidate used to receive their total score along with the number of correctly attempted questions and the number of incorrectly attempted questions, the results released on August 23 did not provide the total score of the candidate. The petitioners have also raised concerns about the NEET-PG having never been held in two shifts before and had always remained a single-shift and single-day examination to ensure a uniform examination standard and fairness of the national exam. They argue that this is a serious patent defect in the conduct of the examination, requiring redressal in order to achieve a clean, transparent and effective system of examination which gives the best candidates.
The petitioners further argue that the NEET-PG is a multidisciplinary exam where one's rank also determines their ability to opt for the course and field of their choice. They contend that any slight variation in marks would bar several candidates from specialising in their field of interest. In response to the petition, the Supreme Court has asked the Centre to respond. Last week, the Bench, also comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, asked the Centre to respond to the petition after senior advocate Vibha Datta Makhija, representing the petitioners, submitted that the Union Health Ministry has failed to appear before the court despite due notice. The apex court had asked advocate-on-record Parul Shukla to inform the office of the Solicitor General, the second-highest law officer of the Centre, and adjourned the hearing.
This is not the first time that the conduct of national level examinations has come under scrutiny. In the past, there have been instances where the transparency and fairness of such examinations have been questioned. However, the current situation is unique in the sense that it involves the NEET-PG examination, which is a crucial gateway for medical students to pursue postgraduate studies in their chosen field of specialisation. The outcome of this case will have significant implications for the future conduct of the NEET-PG and other similar examinations. It raises important questions about the transparency and fairness of examination processes, the rights of students to review their performance, and the need for clear rules and regulations governing the conduct of examinations.
As the nation awaits the reopening of the apex court after Dussehra, the fate of the NEET-PG 2024 hangs in the balance. The court's decision will not only impact the petitioners but also set a precedent for future examinations and their conduct. It is a matter of great interest to students, educators, and policymakers alike, and the nation awaits the court's decision with bated breath.
