The ongoing controversies surrounding the National Eligibility-Entrance Test Postgraduate (NEET-PG) 2024 examination have taken a new turn, with a fresh plea being submitted to the Supreme Court. This plea requests the immediate suspension of the NEET-PG 2024 counselling process, which has only recently commenced after a significant delay. The application has been filed as part of a pending petition challenging the transparency and fairness of the NEET-PG 2024 exam.
According to reports from IANS, the application alleges that the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) is attempting to hasten the counselling process, potentially undermining the rights of petitioner candidates. The Supreme Court had previously set a hearing date for November 19 to address the petition concerning the exam’s transparency. However, the MCC had already announced the schedule for the first round of counselling, with the choice-filling deadline set for November 17, followed by seat allotment on November 18 and 19. The petitioners argue that this rapid progression towards counselling could render their petition infructuous.
The plea, filed by advocate Parul Shukla on behalf of NEET-PG aspirants, emphasizes that the MCC should be instructed to defer the counselling process until the pending petition is resolved. The candidates assert that conducting counselling before the Supreme Court’s scheduled hearing date would result in a fait accompli, effectively closing off their legal recourse.
One of the major contentions highlighted in the petition is the lack of transparency in the conduct of the NEET-PG 2024 exam. The aspirants claim that changes to the examination process, such as the introduction of two separate shifts, the use of a normalization method, and modifications to the tie-breaking criteria just days before the exam, adversely impacted their performance. The petitioners argue that the exam, traditionally conducted as a single-shift, single-day test to maintain uniform standards, was altered in an arbitrary manner this year.
Furthermore, the petition challenges the National Board of Examinations’ (NBE) practice of withholding essential exam materials from candidates. Unlike previous years, the NBE did not provide question papers, answer keys, or response sheets to students, offering only a scorecard instead. This, according to the petitioners, prevents candidates from verifying their performance, thereby raising concerns over the exam’s fairness. The petition notes that in previous years, candidates were provided with their total scores, along with details on correctly and incorrectly answered questions, which was not the case for the results declared on August 23, 2024.
The petitioners have accused the examination authorities of acting arbitrarily, in violation of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to equality. The plea emphasizes the need for a transparent and fair examination system, especially for a critical test like NEET-PG, where even minor discrepancies in scores could affect candidates’ ability to secure their preferred specializations.
The Supreme Court had already taken note of the concerns raised regarding the NEET-PG 2024 exam. On September 20, a bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, had expressed disapproval over the last-minute changes introduced by the NBE. The Court termed these alterations as “unusual” and subsequently issued notices to both the NBE and the Union Government, requesting their responses within a week.
The petitioners have called for a review of the changes implemented in the NEET-PG 2024 examination process to ensure a level playing field for all candidates. The plea underscores the importance of transparency in the examination system, arguing that any deviation from established norms could compromise the merit-based selection of candidates.
The outcome of this legal challenge remains to be seen, with the Supreme Court scheduled to hear the matter on November 19. Meanwhile, the MCC’s decision to proceed with the counselling process has sparked concerns among the aspirants, who fear that their grievances may go unaddressed if the counselling is completed before the Court’s intervention.
(Input from various sources)
(Rehash/Ankur Deka/MSM)