NEET: Supreme Court to examine alternative identity verification methods for candidates unable to use fingerprint biometrics
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has agreed to examine the issue of alternative identity verification methods for specially abled NEET UG candidates who are unable to undergo fingerprint-based biometric authentication due to a medical condition.
The observation was made by a division bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe while hearing a petition filed by a NEET candidate with Adermatoglyphia, a rare condition in which fingerprint ridges do not develop.
The Bench has listed the case for the next hearing on September 21, 2026, and asked Senior Advocate Gopal Shankaranarayanan to assist the Court.
It observed, "We request Mr. Gopal Shankaranarayanan, learned senior counsel, to assist us in the matter, as important issues arise for consideration in the present petition. List on 21.09.2026."
Case background
The case dates back to 2025, when the petitioner appeared for NEET UG 2025 on May 4, 2025. Her examination centre allegedly relied on fingerprint-based biometric verification, but her fingerprints could not be verified because of her condition. However, her condition has no bearing on her health, intelligence, or ability, but it prevents conventional fingerprint scanners from verifying her identity.
Although she reached the centre on time, she was allowed to enter the examination hall only after around 30 minutes. The petition states that she was not granted additional time to compensate for the delay. She subsequently scored 321 out of 720 in NEET UG 2025.
The candidate first approached the Allahabad High Court seeking a fresh examination and an alternative method of identity verification. After the High Court dismissed her plea on November 26, 2025, she approached the Supreme Court, which issued notice on her Special Leave Petition on January 27, 2026.
As per the latest media report by Law Beat, the petition, filed through AoR Dawneesh Shaktivats, argued that examination authorities should have a clear and uniform alternative verification system for candidates who genuinely cannot be authenticated through fingerprints.
It pointed to an NTA public notice issued on January 14, 2025, which had referred to Aadhaar-linked alternatives to fingerprint authentication, including facial authentication tools developed by UIDAI.
On this, the petition questioned why such alternatives were not available at her examination centre when she appeared for NEET UG 2025.
The petitioner has also relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Panchal v. Union of India, concerning candidates who suffered loss of effective examination time because of technical problems during CLAT 2018. In that case, the Court accepted a method of adjusting affected candidates’ scores based on the time actually lost and their answering efficiency during the remaining examination time.
The petition also refers to proceedings before the Delhi High Court concerning NEET UG 2025 candidates who allegedly lost examination time because of biometric verification failures. In those proceedings, the Delhi High Court directed the NTA to streamline its biometric verification process and establish a time-bound grievance redressal mechanism.
NTA allowed alternative verification
Ahead of the NEET UG 2026 examination, the National Testing Agency (NTA) gave an undertaking before the Supreme Court that the petitioner would be allowed to appear using an alternative identity document.
Under the arrangement, her identity could be certified by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate or the Principal of the school she last attended.
The Supreme Court noted that she was subsequently allowed to appear in the rescheduled NEET UG 2026 examination. As a result, it did not consider any further interim direction necessary for her at this stage.
However, the Court decided not to close the larger issue raised in the petition and listed the matter for the next hearing.
The petitioner appeared in the rescheduled NEET UG 2026 examination on June 21, 2026, after the original May 3 examination was affected by a paper leak and subsequently re-conducted. She scored 543 out of 720.
