The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to cancel the NEET exam and ban counseling. A petition was filed to cancel the medical entrance exam NEET due to the alleged paper leak. During the hearing on this, the apex court said that the court also wants to hear the arguments of the exam conducting agency NTA on the allegations of paper leak and rigging. In this regard, the court has issued a notice to the National Testing Agency (NTA) and sought a reply on the allegations of paper leak. The vacation bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah heard the case. For now, the court has refused to ban the counseling for admission to various medical courses including MBBS. The court said that the dignity and sanctity of the exam has been affected.
Let us tell you that Shivangi Mishra and nine others had filed a petition (Shivangi Mishra and others vs National Testing Agency and Diary No. 25656/2024) before the result was declared on June 1. After the release of the NEET result, some more petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court questioning the NTA's decision to give grace marks to many candidates. Those petitions which were filed after the result was declared were not listed on Tuesday.
Now the Supreme Court has also attached other petitions filed regarding NEET with this petition. Now all these will be heard on 8 July 2024.
NTA has formed a committee
The Education Ministry has formed a four-member committee to investigate the grace marks given to about 1600 students in NEET. This committee, headed by the former chairman of UPSC, will submit its report within a week. NTA said that giving grace marks to students (NEET Grace Marks) has not made any difference in the results or qualifying criteria. NTA also rejected the allegations of paper leak. NTA DG Subodh Kumar Singh said, 'This is an issue of only 1600 students. More than 23 lakh children had given the paper. It is a matter of only 6 centers instead of 4750 centers. The committee will investigate the grace marks and time loss case given to these about 1600 students. If needed, their result can be revised. This will not affect the admission process of various medical courses including MBBS and BDS after the NEET result. We will take a decision on the recommendations of the committee.
NTA has denied the paper leak
NTA has denied the leak of NEET paper. It says that the transparency of this exam was not compromised across the country. No paper was leaked. The entire examination process was transparent.
It is worth noting that after 67 students scored 720 out of 720 marks in NEET and the cutoff skyrocketed, thousands of students, parents and coaching operators are accusing of paper leak. Congress has also demanded a judicial inquiry into the NEET case. The clarification given by NTA recently does not seem logical to them. Many NEET candidates allege that the NEET paper leak has badly affected the rank and number. There has been inflation in the rank due to the paper leak. On social media, candidates are continuously running campaigns with the hashtags NEET scam, cancel NEET exam and re-release NEET result.
Apart from the allegations on the NEET paper, where else do students have objections? These are the reasons for the uproar
1. How can there be six toppers from the same exam centre?
Many students say that in the merit list of NEET toppers released by NTA, the roll numbers of 8 students are from the same series. Out of 8 students with serial numbers from 62 to 69, 6 students are toppers who got rank 1. Six out of eight are from the same exam center located in Bahadurgarh, Haryana. On social media, candidates and exam experts have raised doubts about the transparency of NEET. Why is the surname of 7 out of 8 students not written in the list? A snapshot highlighting the NEET roll number, name, marks and rank of these students is also going viral on social media. Out of these 8, 6 students have got 720 out of 720 marks. The other two have got 719, 718. In clarification on this, NTA said a few days ago that the students' time was wasted at the exam center in Haryana, due to which they were given grace marks as compensation.
2. Students, parents and coaching operators have asked that NTA should tell how many students have got grace marks? Who has been given how many marks? The original merit list of NEET should be released even without grace marks.
3. NTA did not give any information about grace marks in the notification. Then why was this policy suddenly implemented in the result and on what basis?
NEET: One mistake made 44 students toppers of NEET, got rank 1 even with wrong answer
4. At which centres time loss has occurred and on what basis have they been given grace marks.
5. NTA should give clarification on normalization. What was its formula? On what basis was it given?
Why are there 67 toppers in NEET, what is the mess, NTA told the story behind it
6. Normalization was applied on students of how many centres.
7. How did they get 718 and 719 marks, when it is impossible. These students argued that the NEET paper is of 720 marks. Each question is of 4 marks and there is negative marking of 1 mark for each wrong answer. If a student answers all the questions correctly then he will get 720 out of 720 and if he leaves one question then he will get 716 marks. If he answers one question wrong then he will be left with 715 marks. In such a situation it is impossible to get 718 and 719 marks. After 720, one can only get 715 and 716 marks.
NEET: No one can get 718 or 719 marks in NEET, NTA responded to the allegations
8. Why was the tie breaking policy of NEET changed at the time of the result? Why was the 8th rule added when there was no mention of it in the notification, there were only 7 parameters? Why was it not told earlier that the person applying first will be placed higher in the merit?
MBBS: Those who apply first in NEET will get benefit in admission, NTA added a new rule at the time of result
9. How many grace marks are given for how much time loss?
10. Why was the NEET result released on the same day as the Lok Sabha election results? Whereas its expected date was 10 days later.
