New Delhi: The Supreme Court is set to convene on Monday to address a series of petitions concerning the contentious National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2024, conducted amidst allegations of paper leak and irregularities. The National Testing Agency (NTA) recently disclosed city- and centre-wise results, revealing disparities and prompting further scrutiny.As per the cause list for July 22, a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra will adjudicate over 40 petitions. These include pleas by the NTA to consolidate cases from various high courts into the Supreme Court to streamline litigation on NEET-UG issues.SC to hear pleas todayAn analysis of NTAs data showed discrepancies, with certain centres exhibiting unusually high performance while others reported subpar results amid allegations of malpractice. The voluminous data of over 32 lakh candidates from 4,750 centres was not released in a cumulative format but in a drop-down menu for each centre. The data was released on the direction of the Supreme Court which is hearing several petitions over the alleged irregularities as lakhs of aspirants await a final verdict on the fate of the exam. Judicial proceedings and previous observationsPreviously adjourned to July 18, the hearing was postponed as responses from the Centre and NTA were pending. The court had received a status report from the CBI on its investigation into the alleged irregularities. Earlier observations hinted at possible breaches in the examinations integrity, hinting at potential repercussions for the affected candidates. The performance of the candidates from the centres under the scanner-such as Oasis School, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, Hardayal Public School, Jhajjar, Haryana, Jay Jalaram International School in Godhra, Gujarat were comparatively much below par. Background and future implicationsNEET-UG is pivotal for admissions to medical and dental courses across India, impacting millions of aspirants. The debate over whether to cancel the exam, order a re-test, or proceed with current results underscores the complexities faced by the judiciary in upholding fairness and transparency in educational assessments.
