Review petition in Supreme Court against NEET 2024 judgment

Although the top court bench upheld the NEET UG 2024 exam, held on May 5, 2024, it also criticised the National Testing Agency (NTA), the authority in charge of conducting the NEET exam, saying that the agency must stop its flip-flops in holding the examination that was noticed this year.

"A body such as NTA which is entrusted with immense responsibility in relation to highly important competitive exams cannot afford to misstep, take an incorrect decision, and amend it at a later stage. All decisions must be well-considered, with due regard to the importance of the decision. Flipflops are an anathema to fairness," observed the bench.

"...the manner in which NTA has organised the exam this year gives rise to serious concerns. The Court is cognizant of the fact that national-level exams with participation from tens of lakhs of students require immense resources, coordination, and planning. But that is precisely the reason for the existence of a body such as NTA. It is no excuse to say that the exam is conducted in myriad centres or that a large number of aspirants appear for the exam. NTA has sufficient resources at its disposal. It has adequate funding, time, and opportunities to organise exams such as the NEET without lapses of the kind that occurred this year," it further noted.

While making these observations, the Apex Court referred to multiple occurrences in the conduct of the exam and highlighted the lapses made by NTA. It pointed out that the paper was leaked in Patna and Hazaribagh and in one of the centres, the rear door of the strongroom was opened and unauthorised persons were admitted to access the question papers. In this regard, the bench noted, "This indicates that there is a serious lapse in security and that security measures which are stringent and effective must be implemented by NTA."

Further, the bench took note of the fact that the question papers were sometimes transported in e-richshaws and the services of private courier companies were available. Referring to the arguments made by the petitioners' counsel Advocate Hooda, the Court noted that NTA did not specify a time by which the OMR sheets were required to be sealed after the conclusion of the exam.