More than 4 Lakh NEET candidates May Lose 5 Marks as SC Directs NTA to Re-Tally Results over 'Ambiguous' Physics Question

New Delhi: More than 4 Lakh NEET-UG 2024 candidates may lose 5 marks as the Supreme Court on Tuesday i.e. on July 23, 2024, asked the National Testing Agency (NTA) to re-tally the results based on the inputs received from the IIT Delhi regarding the physics question having ambiguous options.

Earlier NTA had given full marks to everyone who had chosen Option 2 or Option 4 for "Question No. 29" of the Physics Section. However, this was challenged before the Supreme Court as a student pointed out that the question should have had only one correct answer, not two. Following this, the Supreme Court sought an expert opinion from IIT Delhi in this regard.

Taking note of the expert opinion given by the IIT Delhi team, the Apex Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra observed that Option 2 and 4 were mutually exclusive and could not stand together.

"We accept IIT Delhi report and accordingly NTA shall re-tally the NEET UG result on the basis that option 4 represents the only correct answer to the question. We have not indicated the number of the question since number of questions may vary as per procedure followed in the exam to preserve the integrity of the process," the Apex Court bench ordered yesterday.

Due to this order, lakhs of candidates may lose 4 marks for the question and get one additional negative mark for giving wrong answers. Therefore, more than 4 lakh students will now lose 5 marks and the list of students who might lose the number also includes 44 students who secured the All India Rank 1 as they had scored 720 out of 720 marks.

In the concerned Physics question, candidates were given two Statements. Statement I stated "Atoms are electrically neutral as they contain equal number of positive and negative charges", and Statement II stated, "Atoms of each element are stable and emit their characteristic spectrum."

There were 4 options and the candidates were asked to choose the correct option. Option 1 stated that both the Statements were correct. Option 2 stated that both were incorrect. Option 3 said that Statement I was correct but Statement II was incorrect. Option 4 said that Statement I was incorrect but Statement II was correct.

Earlier, NTA gave full marks for this question to all the candidates who had chosen either Option 1 or Option 4. However, this was challenged before the Supreme Court. 

Also Read: NEET 2024: SC Asks IIT Delhi to Form Panel, Give Expert Opinion on Physics Question Having 'Ambiguous' Options

Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that the counsel for the student submitted that she could not determine that there were two correct answers at the time of the exam. It was submitted that it could not be assumed that there were two correct answers and marks would be awarded for both.

The petitioner's counsel further submitted that the student decided not to attempt because of negative marking. She further submitted that the petitioner did exceptionally well except for this one question and ranked 311. Therefore, if NTA granted the petitioner four marks, the rank would move up. Alternatively, the counsel suggested that the question be deleted and the marks were counted with 716 as the total marks. The counsel submitted that 44 students scored full marks in the NEET UG 2024 exam because they were given marks for the ambiguous question.

While considering the argument, the Supreme Court bench on Monday had asked the Solicitor General why NTA decided to give full marks for both the options. Although SG had claimed that both the options were correct depending on the edition of the NCERT book, the counsel for the petitioner had argued that it was not possible.

She referred to Statement 2 stating "Atoms of each elements are stable and emit their characteristic spectrum." As per NCERT, Atoms of each element, but the new NCERT said that atoms of "most" elements. Referring to this, the counsel argued that both options could not be correct.

When the CJI sought to know which NCERT editions the students expected to follow, the SG submitted that the new edition should be followed. Back then CJI had observed that by giving marks to option 2, NTA was going against its own rule that old edition could not be followed. 

On Monday, the SG had informed the Apex Court that 4,20,774 students had attempted option 2 (old NCERT edition answer) and 9,28,379 attempted option 4 (new NCERT edition answer). He had also submitted that they had received representations from many poor students stating that they used their elder siblings' NCERT books to study.

The top court had, thereafter, decided to set up an expert body to resolve the issue. Accordingly, it sought an expert opinion from IIT Delhi and directed the Director of IIT Delhi to set ip a team of three experts of the subject concerned.

"The expert team constituted by the Director is requested to formulate the opinion on the correct option and remit the opinion to the Registrar by 12 noon tomorrow. Registrar General is requested to communicate the order to the IIT Delhi Director so that expeditious steps for the preparation of the opinion can be taken," the bench had ordered on Monday.

On Tuesday i.e. on July 23rd, 2024, the hearing started with the CJI observing that IIT Delhi submitted a report on the ambiguous question. "The director Prof Banerjee constituted a committee from the dept. of Physics, they say a team of three experts examined the question. They say option 4 is the correct answer," noted the CJI.

""option 4 is " statement 1 is correct but statement 2 incorrect." then they say statement 2 is incorrect because atoms of radioactive elements are not stable," the CJI further observed.

The CJI took note of the fact that the committee clearly opined that there was only 1 option which was option 4. "So NTA was correct in its answer key which was option 4," noted the CJI.

Meanwhile, the Solicitor General urged the bench that those who followed the NCERT book option should not suffer. Responding to this, Justice Manoj Misra noted, "Mr SG, we are not on rote learning. We are also on fundamentals you see.. I am a science student myself.."

The SG, therefore, pointed out that the persons who would be affected would be 4,20,000 students.

In this regard, Advocate Tanvi Dubey appeared on behalf of a student who secured AIR Rank 1 by scoring 720/720 marks. Advocate Dubey stated that if her petitioner would not have attempted the question 19, she would have got 4 marks less, but now if option 4 was selected then she would get 5 marks less and stand at 715 marks. Advocate Dubey also pointed out that the Information Bulletin did not specify that old NCERT book did not have to be referred. She also argued that the rules of the game could not be changed in between.

However, the CJI did not agree to this argument and observed, "So in this case, she may not get AIIMS Delhi but some other AIIMS. But in this case there is no ambiguity also... option 4 is only correct."