A writ petition, titled Dr Aditi v National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences (NBEMS), was filed on April 29, 2025, in the Supreme Court.
This one is allegedly the first of the writ petitions freshly filed in the Supreme Court before the commencement of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for Postgraduate (NEET-PG) courses 2025, reiterating issues that plagued the NEET-PG 2024 exam, such as the lack of transparency in the exam, conducting the exam in double shifts, and others.
The petitioner is being represented by Supreme Court Advocate Abhisht Hela, and it was filed through Advocate on Record (AOR) Sukrirti Bhatnagar.
EdexLive spoke to Advocate Abhisht Hela to learn more about the ongoing case.
What has happened so far?
The petition was first taken up for hearing on May 5, 2025, alongside another related petition filed by the United Doctors’ Front (UDF), both amplifying the issue of the NEET-PG 2025 exam being conducted in a two-shift mode, which many have been protesting against since its inception.
The petition was originally taken up for hearing on May 5, but due to delays in issuing the notice, an urgent mention letter was filed by the advocates, while it was mentioned before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) on May 14, ensuring that it would be heard on May 20.
Additionally, the advocate informed that an ex parte stay application has been filed seeking an interim stay on the exam till a solution is sought.
What does the petition state?
The petition, filed by Dr Aditi and six others, challenges the two-shift format of the NEET-PG 2025 examination, scheduled for June 15, 2025.
Two-shift format, equitable?
The petitioners argue that the two-shift format introduces discrepancies when it comes to difficulty quotient and fair distribution of questions, as per the subjects, violating Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Constitution.
As per the petitioners, the NEET-PG 2024 exam, also conducted in two shifts, showed uneven question distribution — for instance, Pathology had 14 questions in the first shift but 19 in the second.
As per advocate Abhisht, "In an examination such as NEET PG, where even one mark would define your career, conducting the examination in two shifts and then carrying out normalisation to equate and balance out the result… is a bit unfair on the part of the NBE."
Nothing normal about normalisation of marks
The petition also raises concerns about the lack of transparency in the moderation and normalisation processes.
As per the petition, the three-hour gap between shifts has a loophole where question leaks can occur, and the NBEMS’s failure to release question papers, answer keys, and candidate responses might just add to the issue of the exam not being transparent.
"Until and unless the questions are released, question papers are released, how will we even ascertain that the question paper in shift one and in shift two are different? They are not releasing the answer keys as well. So all these things give a very colourful picture... colourful use of authority by the administrative body," stated the lawyer.
Same demands, different year
In September 2024, Dr Ishika Jain and a group of NEET-PG aspirants filed a petition in the Supreme Court of India, raising concerns about the opaque nature of the postgraduate medical entrance exam.
The case, along with the 2025 petition, may be taken up by the bench on Tuesday, May 20.
The petitioners are seeking:
- A single-shift exam
- Proper declaration of question papers and answer keys
- End to normalisation of scores
- Determination of ranks based on percentile marks
- Advocating for raw scores to determine merit
Advocate Abhisht, expressing his apprehensions, told EdexLive that if the respondents (NBEMS, the National Medical Commission [NMC], and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare [MoHFW]) are granted four weeks to respond to the questions posed, it might render the petitions useless, with the exam being conducted on June 15 without any changes made.
"The outcome has the ability to significantly impact these students' futures, and we can only hope for the best until justice is served," said Abhisht.
