Introduction:
The Supreme Court of India, on July 18, 2024, raised significant concerns regarding the Union and the National Testing Agency’s (NTA) assertion that the NEET-UG 2024 paper leak occurred just 45 minutes before the examination in select centers. This scrutiny arose during the hearing of a batch of petitions calling for the cancellation of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) held this year due to alleged paper leaks and other malpractices. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, demanded clarity on whether the breach was isolated to specific centers or indicative of a broader, systemic issue.
Arguments Presented to the Court:
The Union, represented by Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, and the NTA contended that the paper leak was a localized incident restricted to a center in Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. According to their argument, the breach involved an individual unauthorizedly photographing the question papers between 8 AM and 9:20 AM on the day of the exam, May 5. These images were then sent to gang members in Patna who promptly solved and provided answers to the students who had paid for the illicit service. The Solicitor General argued that this rapid operation was feasible due to the involvement of seven individuals who divided the questions amongst themselves.
The Union also emphasized that none of the students who allegedly received the answers managed to achieve qualifying marks, implying that the malpractices did not significantly impact the exam’s integrity. Furthermore, the NTA’s counsel opposed the directive to publish city-wise and center-wise results, arguing it would be an unnecessary disclosure.
Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing the petitioners, challenged the Union’s timeline, suggesting that the paper leak might have occurred a day before the exam, based on an FIR filed by the Patna Police. This claim suggested a broader window for solving and distributing the answers, potentially indicating a more widespread issue.
Additionally, Senior Advocate Narender Hooda argued that the NTA’s claim about the limited nature of the breach was unreliable. He cited media reports about the transportation of question papers in an e-rickshaw in Hazaribagh and the subsequent arrest of the school principal involved. Hooda also pointed out that the question papers were allegedly shared on Telegram channels the day before the exam, challenging the NTA’s assertion that these videos were doctored.
Hooda further criticized the data analytics by IIT Madras, which the Union used to demonstrate a bell-shaped mark distribution curve indicative of normal exam conditions. He argued that the analysis was flawed and did not focus on the top candidates who are more likely to secure admission, thus missing granular abnormalities that could indicate malpractices.
Court’s Observations and Queries:
The Supreme Court posed critical questions to assess the extent and impact of the alleged paper leak:
1. Feasibility of Rapid Solving:
The Court expressed skepticism about the feasibility of solving 180 questions within 45 minutes. Chief Justice Chandrachud remarked that the hypothesis appeared “too far-fetched.”
2. Extent of the Breach:
The Court sought to determine whether the breach was confined to certain centers or if it indicated a widespread problem. It requested data on center-wise and city-wise results to better understand the issue’s scope.
3. Data Analysis Reliability:
The bench questioned the reliability of the IIT Madras data analytics, especially concerning the top candidates. The Court noted that a broader analysis might not reveal localized irregularities and requested more focused data.
4. Center Changes and Corrections:
The Court inquired about the procedural details of center changes allowed by the NTA and the impact of such changes on the results. It asked the NTA to provide specific information on how many candidates changed their centers and how many among them qualified.
Interim Orders and Future Proceedings:
The Supreme Court directed the NTA to publish center-wise and city-wise results while masking candidates’ identities. This move aims to shed light on potential localized irregularities without compromising individual privacy. The Court also requested the Bihar police records on the initial investigation to cross-verify the timelines and claims made by the Union and NTA.
The Court acknowledged that concrete evidence of widespread paper leaks is essential to justify the cancellation of the entire exam. Without such evidence, the drastic measure of canceling NEET-UG 2024 could not be taken. The bench adjourned the further hearing to the following Monday to allow time for the submission and review of additional data and records.