Supreme Court Seeks Disclosure from Government and NTA on NEETUG Counselling Status

Supreme Court Seeks Disclosure from Government and NTA on NEET-UG Counselling Status

The Supreme Court has directed the Union Government and the National Testing Agency (NTA) to provide details on the status of counselling for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2024, which was conducted on May 5 this year. The court’s order comes after a batch of petitions were filed challenging the exam, with the petitioners seeking a re-test due to the paper leak.

A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra heard the case, during which the court emphasized the need to segregate students who were affected by the paper leak from those who were not. The bench noted that if the paper leak was widespread, it could affect the sanctity of the entire exam, and therefore, a re-test might be necessary.

The court sought disclosure from the government and NTA on several aspects, including the modalities to be followed between the exam date and the commencement of the counselling process. The bench also asked the government to provide details on whether counselling should proceed in the meantime or not, pending the identification of further beneficiaries of the question paper leakage.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union Government, requested that the court’s order not record the government’s stance on this issue. However, Chief Justice Chandrachud modified the order to instead seek a “considered decision at the policy level on the status of counselling”.

The court also expressed concerns about the measures that should be taken to ensure the sanctity of the NEET exam in the future and prevent similar incidents from occurring. Chief Justice Chandrachud suggested that the government consider setting up a multi-disciplinary team comprising renowned experts to ensure that adequate measures are taken to prevent future breaches.

The court has listed the matter for further consideration on July 11. The case is titled Vanshika Yadav v. UOI, W.P.(C) No. 335/2024 (and connected matters).



Table of Contents