NEET UG Exam 2024 SC Hearing Highlights: The Supreme Court today announced that there will be no re-test for the NEET UG 2024 exam, despite acknowledging systemic deficiencies in the conduct of the exam. On Tuesday, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) confirmed to the Supreme Court that a paper leak had occurred at the Hazaribagh center. A CBI officer reported that some gadgets used by the involved gang were burnt, while others were recovered yesterday and are now under investigation.
Additionally, the CJI mentioned on Tuesday that they had received a report from IIT Delhi, led by Director Prof. Banerjee, confirming that option 4 is the correct answer for the disputed question. The Court has accepted the IIT Delhi report, and the National Testing Agency (NTA) will re-tally the NEET UG results based on this finding.
On Monday, the apex court directed the Director of IIT-Delhi to set up a team of three experts to examine a specific Physics question from the NEET-UG 2024 examination and submit a report on the correct answer by Tuesday noon. The court’s order to IIT Delhi to establish a team of three domain experts to address this issue came at the end of a day-long hearing on a batch of petitions. These petitions include requests for a re-test of the NEET-UG due to allegations of a question paper leak and other malpractices.
NEET UG 2024 highlights : Supreme Court hears pleas on controversy-ridden NEET-UG exam today. Follow real-time updates from the hearing here!
During the ongoing Supreme Court hearing on NEET-UG 2024, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud posed several key questions to the National Testing Agency (NTA) and the Centre regarding the distribution and handling of the Canara Bank question papers:
– How many exam centres received the Canara Bank papers?
– At these centres, in how many instances were incorrect question papers replaced with the correct ones?
– Overall, how many centres used Canara Bank papers for evaluation, and how did students perform at these centres?
– Why has the key for the Canara Bank papers not been declared?
– How does Canara Bank verify the legitimacy of individuals authorized to issue the papers? Who issues these authorization letters, and do they hold authorization for both Canara Bank and SBI?
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud questioned the rationale behind awarding grace marks for the NEET-UG 2024 exam. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta responded, stating that the decision to award grace marks was deemed incorrect. He explained that the initial decision to grant grace marks was based on time-related issues, but it was later retracted, and a re-test was conducted.
During the Supreme Court hearing on NEET-UG 2024, both the National Testing Agency (NTA) and the Centre admitted to a “mistake” regarding the distribution of question papers to Jhajjar schools.
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud questioned how a representative from Jhajjar managed to collect papers from Canara Bank. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta suggested it might have been an oversight. NTA Counsel explained that Jhajjar was newly added as an exam center, and the City Coordinator might not have been updated on the correct procedure, resulting in the collection of papers from both banks.
CJI inquired whether the banks were notified about the new center’s status, seeking clarification on the communication lapse.
During the Supreme Court hearing on the NEET-UG 2024 case, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud questioned how Hardiyal School obtained question papers from both Canara Bank and another bank. Adv. Hooda had previously highlighted that the school’s principal distributed papers from Canara Bank and was on record about this discrepancy. The CJI asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to explain how this dual sourcing occurred.
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) stated, “We need to determine if the paper leak was localized, with the leak occurring at 9 a.m. and solved by 10:30 a.m. If we find this implausible, the onus is on you to demonstrate that the leak extended beyond Hazaribagh and Pata. From the CBI’s third report, we know the location of the printing press, but we will not disclose it at this time.”
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) observed that witness statements are inconsistent. “One statement suggests the leak occurred on the evening of May 4, while another indicates May 5,” CJI noted during the hearing.
Hooda alleged that the question papers were in private hands for an extended period, stating, “The papers were to be dispatched to centers on April 24 and were scheduled to reach their destinations by May 3, meaning they remained with private parties for an unusually long time.”
The Solicitor General stated, “Following the recent hearing, we compared the success rates of this year’s centers, cities, and states with data from 2022 and 2023. We found no abnormalities.”
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud questioned whether the paper leak occurred at the strong room vault, stating, “If the leak happened on the night of the 4th, it obviously did not occur during transportation but rather prior, at the strong room vault.”
Advocate Narender Hooda alleged that the investigation into the NEET UG 2024 case is being “botched up” by the Government of India. This claim has been contested by the Solicitor General.
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, after reviewing the Bihar Police report, stated that the leak occurred before May 4. He noted that if students were asked to memorize answers on the night of May 4, it implies that the leak must have happened prior to that date.
‘This indicates that students were being asked to memorize on the night of 4th which means that the leak had happened prior to 4th,’ he said.
“Then there are statements of Nitesh Kumar, Amit Anand and Sikander Prasad. Their 161 statements indicate that the leak is much prior to the examination,” alleged Hooda, according to Live Law.
The bench, consisting of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justices J.B. Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, is currently reviewing the statements recorded by the Bihar Police.
– Timing of leak: Senior Advocate Narender Hooda argued that the leak occurred before the question papers were deposited with the banks, specifically on or before May 3. He challenged the suggestion that the leak happened on the morning of May 5, calling it implausible and contrary to Bihar police reports.
– Nature of the leak: Hooda described the leak as the work of a sophisticated gang, rather than a small-scale operation involving just a few individuals. He highlighted that key figures, including Sanjeev Mukhya, have not been arrested.
– Police statements: Hooda referenced the statement of Anurag Yadav recorded by the Bihar police to support his claims.
‘It is not some peon who leaked the paper to 5-10 students, it was the work of a gang who have done it in past too. Sanjeev Mukhya and all have not been arrested,” alleges Adv hooda.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud inquired about what the centre-wise and city-wise data reveals.
Senior Advocate Narender Hooda submitted a note based on the data, stating that the paper leak and dissemination occurred via WhatsApp. He noted that Bihar police materials indicate that students received the leaked papers on May 4, contradicting claims that the leak happened on the morning of May 5.
As the Supreme Court starts addressing NEET issues, Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud has denied an intervening counsel’s request, instructing them to wait while Senior Advocate Narender Hooda continues with the argument.
Hooda highlighted that the NTA has published NEET results without providing All India Ranks or serial numbers of the exam centers. The results are available only on a centre-wise and city-wise basis, raising concerns about transparency.
Petitioners have raised concerns about the bell curve analysis of NEET 2024 scores, citing significant inflation in scores, particularly in the 600-720 range. They argue that the analysis provided by IIT Madras inadequately represents this critical score range and lacks comparison with previous years’ results, which is crucial for detecting anomalies or irregularities. This omission, they claim, undermines the report’s validity and transparency. The petition, filed on July 17, notes that while the bell curve is a basic statistical tool used to represent data, the version computed for NEET UG 2024 by IIT Madras is incomplete, misleading, and underreported.
The Supreme Court is expected to start the NEET UG 2024 hearing shortly.
In Thursday’s Supreme Court hearing, several critical points were addressed:
– NTA’s counsel: The National Testing Agency’s (NTA) counsel discussed the authenticity of the data analysis report from IIT Madras.
– Solicitor General: The Solicitor General addressed issues related to the alleged leak through Telegram and the dissemination of the exam paper.
– Petitioners’ advocates: Advocates representing the petitioners argued about the nature and extent of the alleged paper leak and its impact on the examination process.
Congress MP Manickam Tagore on Monday filed an adjournment motion notice in the Lok Sabha to address the ongoing controversy surrounding alleged irregularities in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) and University Grants Commission-National Eligibility Test (UGC-NET). Tagore’s notice calls for the suspension of all listed business to discuss “unprecedented cases of paper leaks” and the National Testing Agency’s (NTA) failure to manage the exams. The move follows repeated adjournments in previous sessions, where opposition parties, including Congress, pressed for a debate on the NEET-UG issue, while the government focused on other legislative priorities.
During the NEET-UG 2024 hearing on Thursday, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud expressed skepticism about the Center’s claim that 180 questions could have been memorized in just 45 minutes following an alleged paper leak. The CJI pointed out that if the questions were solved in such a short timeframe, the leak must have occurred before the morning of May 5. He suggested that if the paper was solved before the exam, the leak would have happened on the night of May 4, or earlier.
Chandrachud outlined two potential scenarios for the leak. The first is that it occurred before the papers were secured at Canara Bank and SBI, meaning the leak happened before May 3. The second possibility is that the leak happened after the papers were released from the banks but before they reached the exam centers. The court is examining these hypotheses as part of the ongoing investigation.
Following the release of scores for over 23 lakh NEET-UG 2024 candidates by the NTA, petitioners in the paper leak case have filed an Intervention Application (IA) with the Supreme Court. The application requests a retest for nearly 3.5 lakh top scorers, who achieved marks between 650 and 680 out of 720. The petitioners acknowledge that organizing a retest is complex and has significant implications, suggesting that a practical solution should be considered.
The Supreme Court has yet to decide whether NEET UG 2024 will be re-conducted. The court is expected to make a decision today (July 22) as it reviews over 40 petitions related to the exam.
The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) has announced the list of test cities for the NEET PG 2024. The board also clarified that the test city and center information provided in the previously issued admit cards for the exam scheduled on June 23 is no longer valid. Updated details will be available in the new admit cards, set to be released on August 8.
In the most recent hearing, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud outlined two potential scenarios for the NEET-UG 2024 paper leak. He suggested that the leak could have occurred either before the exam papers were secured in the banks or after they had been transferred to the exam centers.
The Supreme Court is set to address 40 petitions related to the NEET-UG 2024 case today. This includes pleas from the National Testing Agency (NTA) requesting the transfer of cases pending in various High Courts to the apex court, aiming to consolidate proceedings and avoid multiple litigations.
The Supreme Court has previously observed that any decision to conduct NEET-UG 2024 afresh must be based on solid evidence proving that the integrity of the entire exam was compromised. On Thursday, a bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, along with Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, noted the “social ramifications” of the case and postponed other matters to prioritize the NEET-UG petitions. The bench instructed the petitioners, who are seeking cancellation, a re-test, and a court-monitored investigation into alleged irregularities, to demonstrate that any potential paper leak was “systemic” and affected the entire examination.
CJI Chandrachud stated, “Re-examination must be based on concrete evidence that the sanctity of the entire test was affected,” underscoring the need for substantial proof before proceeding with any drastic measures.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) questioned a first-year MBBS student from Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS) in connection with the NEET-UG paper leak case. The student, residing in the girls’ hostel at RIMS, was approached by the CBI earlier this week.
RIMS Public Relations Officer Rajiv Ranjan confirmed that the CBI contacted the hospital management on Wednesday to arrange the questioning. The management cooperated fully, and the student was interrogated again on Thursday. The CBI indicated that further questioning will be required.
Over 240 NEET-UG candidates from a test center in Rajkot, Gujarat, have achieved scores above 600 marks, with 11 of them scoring 700 or more. Notably, one candidate attained a perfect score of 720. The National Testing Agency (NTA) published these results on Saturday, amid scrutiny over alleged irregularities, including a potential paper leak.
At the Rajkot-based School of Engineering, RK University test center, 12 candidates scored 700 or higher. Their scores included one perfect 720, two candidates with 710, four with 705, one with 704, one with 701, and three with 700.