New Delhi: The Supreme Court addressed multiple issues regarding the 2024 NEET-UG examination. This included a challenge to question number 29, which the petitioner argued had ambiguous choices. The court also examined claims of tough questions and the distribution of incorrect question papers. Additionally, there were concerns that the question paper might have been leaked before May 4. The court asked the petitioners to provide data to demonstrate that the paper leak was widespread.
The conundrum of question No. 29
A petitioner’s counsel submitted before a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud that regarding questions No. 29 and 44 students, who opted for the 'incorrect' answer, were given 'grace marks' and scored 720/720.
The counsel said her client decided not to answer the question and scored 711 out of 720 while pointing at negative markings in the exam. The counsel said, "Against the backdrop of negative marking, there could be only one answer to a question and as a result, her client decided to not answer it. The counsel said her client holds rank 311 and if four marks were to be awarded for this question to her then she would move."
The counsel argued that if the National Testing Agency (NTA) had not given marks for this question, then the petitioner would have scored higher percentile.
The bench, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, stressing that the petitioners’ argument carries weight, said that if marks were awarded to those who answered even 'option 2', the NTA would increase the number of toppers.
The bench asked if 'option 4' is the correct answer, according to the latest NCERT textbook, then how it is possible that those who answered 'option 2' got full marks.
The petitioner stressed that it is not possible to assume there are two correct answers to a question and that marks would have to be awarded for an answer.
The bench queried Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the NTA, "Why did NTA come to this conclusion... to give marks for both options?" He replied that because both were possible answers. Mehta’s reply was disputed by the petitioner’s counsel saying that “it is not possible….”.
The apex court was informed that students were expected to follow the new NCERT textbook, according to which 'option 4' is the right answer and over four lakh students selected option 2 and got four extra marks.
Concluding the day-long hearing, the bench asked the director of IIT Delhi to constitute a team of three experts to resolve the issue regarding the correct option and the opinion of the experts should be submitted by noon tomorrow.
A volley of questions to NTA on the distribution of wrong question paper. The NTA counsel faced a flurry of questions by the CJI in connection with the distribution of wrong question papers at various centres. The CJI asked another counsel representing the NTA, in how many centres the wrong question papers, collected from Canara Bank, were distributed. Why were students allowed to attempt the wrong question paper, which was collected from the Canara bank by an authorised person for three hours?
The CJI further queried, how many students were evaluated based on question paper, which was collected by the authorised person from the Canara Bank instead of the State Bank of India.
The CJI asked why the NTA did not declare the answer key of the question paper, which came from the Canara Bank. Also, why did the authorised person or city coordinator not visit the SBI branch to collect the NEET questions paper and instead go to Canara Bank?
The bench asked, who issues the authorisation to city coordinators to fetch question papers from the bank.
The CJI asked why the Canara Bank gave the wrong question paper to the authorised person. What was the communication of the NTA regarding the question papers to the Canara Bank and SBI?
The bench also asked, why the Jhajjar city coordinator took back the Canara Bank question paper from only two centres and not from the third one.
Probability of leak of question paper before May 4
Against the backdrop of facts presented before the court, the CJI observed that it appears that the leak of the question paper happened before May 4.
Senior advocate Narender Hooda, representing the petitioners, argued that the NEET question paper was leaked before it was deposited in the bank and stressed that the Centre’s statement that the paper breach happened on the morning of May 5, the examination day, is not correct. Hooda added that there are statements of the accused -- Nitesh Kumar, Amit Anand and Sikander Prasad -- in Bihar, and also their 161 statements indicate that the leak occurred much before the examination.
Mehta, representing the Centre, submitted that Amit Anand is a middleman and he was collecting the students on the night of May 4 so that he could get the papers on May 5, and Nitish Kumar was at the place where the papers were received on May 5.
Citing Amit Anand’s statement, the CJI said the papers were handed over to students on the night of May 4 to memorise the answers. The CJI said the statements of one of the accused are at variance: one statement says the leak happened on May 4 night, and the second statement says it was received on WhatsApp on May 5 morning. The CJI said it appears that the leak took place before the papers reached the bank.
The CJI said if the leak had taken place on the night of May 4, then obviously the leak did not take place not during the transportation, rather it took place prior, probably at the strong room vault in the bank. The CJI also wondered that all problem solvers are students and none of them are professors. Mehta said he is told that for this work, students are better prepared.
The CJI asked the petitioners’ counsel, who argued for cancellation of the NEET UG exam, that they would have to establish that incidents in Hazaribagh have spread across the country and it was a systemic failure. The CJI asked Hooda to show the data, which establishes that the leak was widespread.
Senior advocate Sanjay Hedge, representing a petitioner, said NTA continued to deny the fact and it did not cooperate with the Bihar police, though the paper was leaked. Hedge stressed that admittedly there has been a leak from Hazaribagh and the leak of paper was caught in Patna, and added, “We do not know the extent of the leak”, and stressed that NTA has not been transparent so far.
Advocate Mathews J Nedumpara, representing a petitioner, said this exam should be treated as a preliminary exam and the NTA should conduct a main NEET UG exam.
Issue of a new textbook and the old textbook
The NTA informed the apex court regarding the pleas of the candidates from economically weaker sections, as they could not afford to buy the new NCERT books and had studied from siblings’ older books. However, this contention left the judges unimpressed and the bench said it was not sufficient to explain how an incorrect answer was recognised as a correct one and made it clear that "both can't co-exist."
Read more: SC to NTA: Publish NEET UG 2024 Results City-wise, Centre-wise By Saturday
