NEET UG 2024: Observing that self-denial is only adding to the problem, the Supreme Court on Monday said it was clear a leak has taken place in the NEET UG 2024 examination, but ordering a retest depends on whether the alleged breach was at a systemic level and affected the integrity of the entire process, and whether it was possible to segregate the beneficiaries of the fraud from untainted students.
“The fact that the sanctity of the examination has been breached… compromised, is beyond doubt. Now the question is how widespread is the breach,” Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud said while hearing petitions of those seeking as well as those opposing cancellation of the May 5 NEET UG exams over paper leak allegations.
The CJI-led Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, said it may be far-fetched for it to presume, unless the government and its agencies point out material to it, that all 23 lakh students or a substantial number of them were involved in the fraud.
“For all we know, a large number of students may be honest…,” the CJI said even as the bench conveyed anguish if the exam was to be cancelled.
The court also directed the Centre, the NTA and the CBI to file their affidavits by 5 pm July 10 and share these with the petitioners as well.
“If we are not able to identify candidates who are guilty of wrongdoing, the retest has to be ordered. If you can’t distinguish the grain from the chaff, tainted from the untainted, it has to be ordered…,” said Chandrachud.
“…where the breach is confined to specific areas or centres and it is possible to identify those who are beneficiaries of wrongdoing, it may not be appropriate to order a retest, particularly of an examination which has been conducted on such a massive scale involving over 23 lakh students,” the Supreme Court said.
“We are of the view that an order on merits would have to be deferred. NTA is directed to make full disclosure before the court… in three areas – nature of leak, places where the leak took place, and the lag of time between leak and conduct of the exam,” the court said. It asked the NTA to clarify “when the leak first took place, how the question papers leaked were disseminated” and “the time duration between the occurrence of leak and the exam on May 5”.
It would be necessary for the government to set up a multi-disciplinary team of renowned experts to ensure due measures are taken to obviate any future breaches, the Supreme Court said. The bench asked the government to inform it about the constitution of the committee so that the court could take a call on whether there needed to be any additions to it.
On the demand for a retest, the court said, “We have to see what was the modality in which the leak took place. If the modality of the leak is through electronic means, social media, then there is a possibility that the leak is extremely wide.”
The CJI said, “We are flagging these issues. We want you to give a comprehensive analysis of dates because if the leak is taking place through telegram, WhatsApp… social media, or an electronic means of communication, (it) spreads like wildfire. On the other hand, we must also balance it out with the time in which the leak takes place. If it’s more or less on the morning of May 5, then the time between when the leak takes place and students have to go for the examination is very limited.”
The court wondered if it’s possible to identify some red flags and apply data analytics to it to separate the grain from the chaff.
Pointing out that a higher number of students securing 720 marks out of 720 this year compared with previous years, can be a red flag, the CJI said, “Everybody who gets 720 is not a fraudster. There may still be people who are extraordinary, and bright in that 720 out of 720. But we found that for the previous years, the proportion was very low. This year it suddenly goes up to 67.”
He added, “if we have to separate the greens from the chaff, we will have to identify certain red flags. Those who fall in the red flag category, we may have to hold a limited rate for that category alone.”
Appearing for the government and NTA, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said, “We examined the pattern of the hundred top-ranking students. It showed they were distributed among 95 centres located in 56 cities, which are spread out in 18 states, union territories.”
The court said it wants to know the steps taken by the government and NTA to identify the beneficiaries “because we have to be ruthless in identifying the beneficiaries”. Mehta submitted that the results of those identified had been withheld.
The bench said it wants to know how many have been identified. “Overall in the entire country…how many students are there whose results have been withheld, we won’t say systemic, as a result of the leakage? Where are those students situated? We want to know the geographical distribution of the students. Are they in one state? Are they in multiple states?” the CJI sought to know. “If we have no go, we will have to cancel the exams, but as a court, this cancellation of the test of this nature, 23 lakh students, is a matter of extreme last resort,” he said.