'IIT Madras Report On NEET-UG Unreliable, NTA Member Was Director': Students Tell Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday, resumed hearing the petitions alleging paper leak and malpractices in the NEET-UG exams 2024.

The top court has now decided to assess the IIT-Madras report on NEET-UG results

Source : PTI

The Supreme Court on Thursday, resumed hearing the petitions alleging paper leak and malpractices in the NEET-UG exams 2024. The CJI DY Chandrachud said that the petitioners' lawyer will have to show the top court that the paper leak was so systemic that a re-test is needed. The top court further said that in case it decides to not order a re-test, it would like the lawyer to suggest the line of investigation. The top court was told by Senior Advocate Narender Hooda that the IIT Madras report cannot be relied upon.

At the outset, the Hooda appearing for the petitioners told the court that he is handicapped in assisting the court as the CBI was supposed to file its status report and as per direction they had to give it to us. But, he was not provided with the CBI status report. He further said that the NTA has not yet declared the entire results.

"UPSC declares the result of the entire people. At least NTA should have declared the results of the one lakh people who would get admissions."

CJI DY Chandrachud said "investigation is going on and I am all about transparency but we have to ensure that by disclosing the status report, investigation is not scuttled." 

"I am handicapped in assisting the court as they have only declared the result of 100 people. Government college has 56000 seats and everyone will clamour for these seats...There are a total of 1,08,000 seats when we add private college seats to government students. Even people who are not in this 1,08,000 list, would like to re-appear..." Hooda told in court. 

Hooda said that if the re-examination happens, the total number is one lakh eight thousand and not 23 lakhs.

Hooda said that the IIT Madras analytics based on 23 lakh student's performance is not reliable and that the analytics should have been done on the basis of 1 lakh eight thousand candidates who would get admissions.

"According to you it has to be done on the restrictive figure of 1 lakh eight thousand," CJI asked.

Hooda, appearing for petitioners, further alleged that there is a conflict of interest since the IIT Madras Director is member of the governing body of NTA.

SG Tushar Mehta however said that it is factually wrong and he was just an ex-official member of NTA and had appointed someone else on his behalf. 

The top court has now decided to assess the IIT-Madras report. 

Senior advocate Hooda appearing for candidates challenged the IIT reports:

(1.) There is conflict of interest as the Director IIT Madras was a member of governing body of NTA.

(2.) IIT report based on data of 23 lakh students where it should have been 1,08,000 students who are eligible for admission. In such large data unfair means can't be detected.

(3) NTA has given data only for three cities and not entire data. They have done scrutiny to suit their own agenda. "There are 571 cities. They say toppers are evenly spread. But the data they give is of only 17 students. Why are they shying away? If they have run it for top 100, they should give for top 100 and not just 17," the counsel for students told the top court.

"IIT-Madras report cannot establish that paper leak and malpractices were not there. IIT has also not been able to pinpoint red-flags," Hooda said.

He further contended that the inflation of marks is admitted, paper leak is admitted and the bell shaped curve in the IIT report is not an indication that there is no abnormality as the data is too large, in which the tainted candidates cannot be caught.

"Granular variations can't be seen with this large data of 23 lakh candidates," Hooda argued.

The Supreme Court will decide whether there should be a re-examination or not after hearing NTA and Centre's response to the arguments made by Hooda and other lawyers representing NEET aspirants.