The Supreme Court hearing on the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2024 happened today, Monday, July 22, heard by the bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.
As the deliberations on the issue of the paper leak ensue, and the bench examines the possibility of re-NEET, the case presented by Advocate Matthew Nedumpara discusses that the issues springing up are not unknown for the system.
As per LiveLaw, Nedumpara, stated that the leak industry is worth 2500 crores and that "Leak has been happening for many many years, 2013, 2014, 2016. Stations in Haryana which were talking about were involved then too", he stated.
Another counsel finding an importune moment, discussed the "Tanvi Sarwal vs Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE)" case of 2015, which focuses on a crucial legal conflict regarding the use of unfair means and malpractice in examinations, particularly in the All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Test (AIPMT).
Why is it important for the ongoing case? Here are a few details
1) In 2015, the CBSE conducted the All-India Pre Medical/Predental Entrance Test for the academic year 2015-2016. The exam was scheduled on May 3 between 10.00 am to 1.00 pm, which was attempted by more than six lakh students in 1,050 centres all over the country.
2) However, on May 4, 2015, a news report surfaced stating that 90 answer keys were circulated to the examinees during the examination, in lieu of an amount of Rs 15 to 20 lakh being paid to the perpetrator, named Roop Singh (as named by several accused). He had assured the individuals of a seat at a government medical college in exchange for the money.
3) Subsequently, Haryana's Rohtak police arrested seven individuals, including two doctors and one MBBS student, for conspiring to transmit the answer keys. An investigation further revealed that the arrested individuals had collaborated with others, to arrange vests equipped with SIM cards and Bluetooth devices.
4) After the revelation, the court decided to declare the examination null and void, after a writ petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, which grants the right to the citizens to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of the fundamental rights, in the interest of public welfare. The petitioner had requested for the examination to be cancelled as it was deemed unfair to other students.
Relevance to the ongoing case
Reiterating the event, the counsel from the Tanvi Sarwal vs CBSE case, quoted, as per LiveLaw
"Segregation only of the already 44 identified candidates stated to be the beneficiaries of the unprincipled manoeuvre by withholding their results for the time being, in our comprehension cannot be the solution to the problem that confronts all of us. Not only thereby, if the process is allowed to advance, it would be pushed to a vortex of litigation pertaining thereto in the foreseeable future, the prospects of the candidates would not only remain uncertain and tentative, they would also remain plagued with the prolonged anguish and anxiety if involved in the ordeal of court cases. Acting on this option, would in our estimate, amount to driving knowingly the students, who are not at fault, to an uncertain future with their academic career in jeopardy on many counts. Further, there would also be a lurking possibility of unidentified beneficiary candidates stealing a march over them, on the basis of the advantages availed by them through the underhand dealings as revealed. Having regard to the fact, that the course involved with time would yield the future generations of doctors of the country, who would be in charge of public health, their inherent merit to qualify for taking the course can by no means be compromised."
Take his statement further, the counsel argued that if the matter is not simplified, and justice is not provided to students, there would remain a certain sense of anguish and anxiety, and they would forever remain under doubt.
Furthermore, this would give more chances for perpetrators to indulge in such dealings in the future as well. Additionally, the medical infrastructure of the country might face degradation when it comes to quality of doctors.
As per LiveLaw, the counsel further quoted,
"We are conscious of the fact that every examination being conducted by a human agency is likely to suffer from some shortcomings, but deliberate inroads into its framework of the magnitude and the nature, as exhibited, in the present case, demonstrate a deep seated and pervasive impact, which ought not to be disregarded or glossed over, lest it may amount to travesty of a proclaimed mechanism to impartially judge the comparative merit of the candidates partaking therein. If such an examination is saved, merit would be a casualty generating a sense of frustration in the genuine students, with aversion to the concept of examination."
Quoting from the case, the counsel stated that although there might be issues with such exams being conducted, if such revelations are ignored, then it may have a deep-seated impact on the future of such exams, further giving incentive to such mechanisms of cheating and paper leaks. It can also lead to meritorious students gradually developing a sense of disbelief towards such examinations as they might believe that their merit would not be given enough credit, due to malpractices.
Another important point he added:
"We are aware, that the abrogation of the examination, would result in some inconvenience to all concerned and that same extra time would be consumed for holding a fresh examination with renewed efforts therefor. This however, according to us, is the price, the stakeholders would have to suffer in order to maintain the impeccable and irrefutable sanctity and credibility of a process of examination, to assess the innate worth and capability of the participating candidates for being assigned inter se merit positions commensurate to their performance based on genuine and sincere endeavours."
On the importance of conducting the exam again, the counsel stated that the cancellation of the examination will certainly cause inconvenience and require additional time and effort to hold a new one.
However, he argued that this will be necessary to ensure the integrity and credibility of the examination process, which is crucial for accurately assessing the candidates' capabilities and determining their merit based on genuine efforts.
Lastly, he said, "Even if, one undeserving candidate, a beneficiary of such illegal machination, though undetected is retained in the process it would be in denial of, the claim of more deserving candidates."
Adding to an important point, he insinuated that if even one undeserving candidate benefits from illegal actions and remains undetected in the process, it would unfairly deny more deserving candidates their rightful opportunities. This may dissolve the purpose of conducting a fair examination.
