NEET PG 2024: MP HC allows normalisation plea, tells NBE to Issue Fresh State Merit List of In-Service Candidates
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jabalpur: Granting relief to the postgraduate medical aspirants who challenged the double normalization process of marks while preparing the state merit list, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed the entire state merit list altogether.
Further, the HC bench has asked the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS), the authority in charge of conducting the NEET-PG examination, to prepare a fresh state rank list for the in-service candidates.
"...the State merit list of NEET PG 2024 examination for the State of Madhya Pradesh cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed. National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences is directed to prepare the State merit list afresh by awarding the incentivised marks to the in-service candidates not on their raw scores but on their normalised scores," ordered the HC bench.
"The exercise be carried out, as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms..." further mentioned the Court.
Also Read: MP HC puts hold on NEET PG counselling results, issues stay on further process
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that a plea was filed before the High Court challenging the 'normalisation' process of marks undertaken a second time for the candidates registered for counselling. The petitioners also challenged the merit list issued by the State for the Madhya Pradesh State Registered Candidates for NEET PG Counselling (MD/MS Course) - 2024.
In their plea, the candidates pointed out that NEET PG 2024 carried out 'normalisation' of the marks while preparing the merit list. Meanwhile, they highlighted that the State, while preparing the list of candidates registered from Madhya Pradesh for counselling, undertook the 'normalisation' process a second time, thereby reducing their ranking in the merit of the State despite their higher ranking in the NEET merit list.
Previously, the Court had directed the State Government not to declare the results of the counselling for admission to medical postgraduate (PG) courses till the next date of hearing on November 28. However, the HC bench had allowed the State to continue with the first round of counselling for Pre-PG medical till November 24 (midnight).
Sharing the High Court's direction to the NBEMS to issue a fresh merit list, the former Chairman and current patron of the Federation of All India Medical Association (FAIMA), Dr. Rohan Krishnan wrote on X (formerly Twitter), "In 2024 #NEETPG Scams can have multiple names …… #Normalisation #EWS #In service quota God Help our Poor aspirant, we feel for you. See how High Court of Madhya Pradesh is also shocked by answers of @NbeIndia !!!!! @JPNadda ji should quit as HM @MoHFW_INDIA as he has no time for us????"
Court's Observations:
During the proceedings of the case, the HC bench noted that the methodology that was adopted for drawing up the State Specific Rank, as submitted by NBEMS, was never notified. What had been notified was only the methodology for drawing up the All India Merit List, noted the Court.
"What NBEMS has done is that they have prepared the All India Merit List adopting the normalisation process and a comparative merit list is prepared by applying the percentile method. For preparation of the State List, they have gone back to the raw scores pre normalisation and added the incentivised marks to the raw scores and then applied the normalisation process," the HC bench observed.
Calling the Hypothesis mentioned in the NBE's note "fallacious", the bench noted that the hypothesis begins with a presumption that 30% or 20% or 10% addition is being sought by the petitioners to be done on the percentile, which is not the case.
"Further, NBEMS has granted incentivised marks on the raw scores prior to normalisation, which is where the error has crept in. Candidates have to be granted incentivised marks on their normalised scores to create a level playing field," the Court further noted.
"Normalisation is a statistical process that equalises scores across multiple examination shifts. It is used when the examinations are conducted in multiple shifts for the same syllabus. The difficulty level can vary between sessions. Normalisation ensures that all candidates have an equal opportunity by adjusting their raw scores across shifts," observed the bench.
Giving examples, the bench explained that if the incentivised marks were awarded after normalisation of raw scores, then the relative advantage to candidates would be equal. However, if the incentivised marks were awarded before normalisation of raw scores, then the relative advantage to candidates would not be equal but would be compounded by the difference in the degree of difficulty of the two shifts as has happened in this case. By taking into account the difference of the raw scores of the toppers, the degree of difficulty is approximately 1.6736402% between Shift 1 and Shift 2, the real advantage is approximately 31.6735402% and not 30%.
The bench noted that "Since, NBEMS has added 30% incentive to the raw scores pre normalisation, it has led to a compounded benefit to candidates of one of the Shifts of approximately 1.6736401% i.e. an incentive of approximately 31.6736401% instead of 30% and similarly 21.6736401% and 10.6736401%respectively. In an examination where the result is calculated upto 7 decimals, this makes a world of a difference."
Further, the bench observed that the methodology of percentile as contended by the NBEMS does not reflect the substantive merit of a candidate but a comparative merit of the candidate. In this view, the court opined that it completely defies logic as to how a candidate who has scored higher in comparison to another candidate in the All India rank list has scored lower in the State List in comparison to the same candidate. The comparison of scores has to be in relation to the examination and not a list. It is unfathomable that a candidate in the same examination is higher in one list and lower in another list vis a vis the same candidate.
"If the ranking in the All India List merit list is based on relative performance, then the relative performance of two candidates cannot change when they are separated and placed in the State List," noted the Court.
Accordingly, it quashed the the State Merit List for the NEET-PG 2024 examination for the State of Madhya Pradesh and directed NBEMS to prepare the State Merit List afresh by awarding the incentivised marks to the in-service candidates, not on their raw scores but on their normalised scores.
