Students Met Union Education Minister Over Concerns Related To NEET UG Exam

NEET Row: On Thursday, students met Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan to discuss NEET-UG exam concerns.

A group of students met with the Union Education Minister over NEET-UG related concerns.

Source : PTI Images

A group of students on Thursday met with Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan at his residence to discuss concerns related to the NEET-UG examination. The students presented their issues and sought clarification on various aspects of the exam. Pradhan listened to their grievances and assured them that their concerns would be addressed. He emphasised the government's commitment to ensuring a fair and transparent examination process that aligns with students' educational aspirations and future careers.

Earlier today, the Supreme Court postponed the hearing on the case to July 18, a day after the National Testing Agency (NTA) submitted its affidavit to the apex court.

Initially, Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud scheduled the matter for July 12 (tomorrow) as the first item, but it was then adjourned until Monday. The Solicitor General (SG) mentioned difficulty for Monday and Tuesday, prompting the CJI to reschedule the NEET case for July 18.

In its affidavit to the apex court, NTA said, “No question paper was found missing in any Trunk. Each question paper has a unique serial number and was assigned to a particular candidate. No locks were found broken. The reports from NTA Observers did not report anything adverse. The CCTV coverage in the Command Centre was constantly monitored. No untoward incident or any pointer to paper leakage was observed.”

The Centre mentioned that for the 2024-25 academic year, the counselling process for undergraduate seats will begin in the third week of July and will be conducted in four rounds.

The affidavit stated that according to findings by IIT Madras, the marks distribution follows the bell-shaped curve typical of any large-scale examination, indicating no abnormalities. "The analysis shows no indication of mass malpractice or a localised set of candidates benefitting with abnormal scores," it said.