NEET 2024 Controversy: Can't Hold Re-test for Solitary Candidate, says SC on aspirant's plea

Published On 2024-07-01 12:13 GMT   |   Update On 2024-07-01 12:13 GMT
Advertisement

New Delhi: While considering a plea alleging the involvement of the National Testing Agency (NTA) officers in the manipulation of the OMR sheets of the NEET-UG exam, the Supreme Court today i.e. on July 1st clarified that a re-test cannot be held for a solitary person. 

"Are you thinking that for you, a solitary person, a re-test will be conducted? Please do not hope against hope," the top court vacation bench of Justices C.T Ravikumar and Manoj Misra told the counsel appearing for the petitioner.

Advertisement

Adjourning the plea, the Apex Court has listed it for a further hearing on 8th July, 2024.

The petitioner submitted that he appeared in the National Eligibility-and-Entrance Test Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2024 examination on May 5th, 2024 and allegedly his OMR was swapped. Based on that, he had urged the court to allow him to appear in the NEET-UG 2024 re-test held on June 23, 2024. 

Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that NTA held a re-test for 1563 candidates, who were earlier awarded grace marks to compensate for their loss of time during the exam. The Union Government and NTA decided to withdraw the grace marks after the issue was challenged before the Supreme Court.

Also Read: NEET 2024 Paper Leak Case: SC Stays Proceedings in 3 High Courts

As per the latest media report by Live Law, the Apex Court vacation bench questioned the petitioner's counsel for approaching the Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Responding to this, the counsel submitted, "I am a topper of these exams. Respondents had the audacity to swap my OMR, and the same two petitions were filed before the High Court.

However, considering the fact that the petitioner was asking for a re-test and the re-neet for 1563 candidates was conducted on June 23rd, the Apex Court bench observed, "The examination in which you want an order in your favour to allow you to appear, that was already over on 23.06.2024."

Responding to this, the counsel stated that the relief measure may be granted in case a re-test is ordered by the Top Court.

Earlier, the top court had adjourned the plea to this week after asking the petitioner to withdraw a similar plea filed before the High Court. Previously, the petitioner had also requested a week's time to file an affidavit explaining the pendency of a similar plea before the High Court. However, during the hearing of the case on July 1st, the counsel for the petitioner requested the Court to grant two days to place on record this affidavit. 

Ultimately, the Court adjourned the matter to two weeks and observed that it would not observe anything in the plea. Listing the matter for further hearing on July 8, the Court observed, "Sometimes, if you are fortunate, some order will be there in the other matter. We do not know if that will re-resurrect your claim. It depends. On this matter, we will not say anything."

Although the counsel persisted in listing the matter on July 09, however, Justice Ravikumar refused to do so and observed, "Are you thinking that for you, a solitary person, a re-test will be conducted? Please do not hope against hope."

This year's NEET UG 2024 exam was mired in controversies after a paper leak scam came to light. Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that around 13 people, including four examinees and their family members, were arrested in Bihar for their alleged involvement in the paper leak of the NEET-UG exam. Patna police sources had previously claimed that the NEET-UG question papers along with their answers were provided to around 20 aspirants a day before the date of the exam i.e. May 5, 2024.

Then, the Economic Offences Unit (EOU) of Bihar Police, which took over the investigation, revealed that the brokers involved in the NEET paper leak scam took between Rs 30 lakh to Rs 50 lakh from each of the medical aspirants in exchange for giving them the question paper of the NEET UG 2024 question paper ahead of the examination.

Multiple pleas have been filed before the High Courts and the Supreme Court seeking an investigation into the alleged paper leak scam. Some of the pleas demanded the scrapping of the NEET UG 2024 exam and holding a retest. Meanwhile, during the case proceedings, NTA earlier decided to withdraw the grace marks awarded to 1563 candidates and hold an optional retest for those candidates. Those who did not opt for the retest were allowed to retain their original marks, without the grace marks.

The matter is now being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Central Government on June 22, 2024, handed over the charge of investigating in the alleged irregularities in the NEET UG 2024 examination to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

"Certain cases of alleged irregularities / cheating / impersonation / malpractices have been reported. For transparency on the conduct of the examination process, the Ministry of Education, Government of India after a review has decided to entrust the matter to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for a comprehensive investigation," the Ministry of Education stated in a release.

Earlier, while considering the NEET-related pleas, the Supreme Court had refused to defer the counselling/seat allotment process scheduled to commence on July 6. However, the bench had orally observed that the admissions would be subject to the final outcome of the petitions and if the exams were set aside, the counselling would get invalidated consequentially.

The Top Court had also expressed its concern over the alleged discrepancies in the NEET UG 2024 exam. The Court had noted that even '0.001& negligence' in conducting the NEET-UG 2024 exams would be looked into with all seriousness considering the immense labor put in by the candidates for the prestigious examination.

Also Read: NEET 2024 Results Row: Supreme Court pulls up NTA, says 'Even 0.001 percent negligence Should be Thoroughly Dealt With'

Tags:    
Article Source : with inputs from Live Law

Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.

NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.

Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Similar News