NEET-PG 2025: PIL against "unintelligible" answer key heard by SC

The SC bench, comprising CJI Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, referred the matter to a bench led by Justice Pardiwala, who ordered more transparency in NEET-PG 2025
NEET-PG 2025: PIL against "unintelligible" answer key heard by SC
NEET-PG 2025: PIL against "unintelligible" answer key heard by SCPic: IANS
Published on

Today, Monday, September 1, the Supreme Court of India heard a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by a group of National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET-PG 2025) aspirants relating to the newly released answer keys.

The request disputes a “corrective notice” given by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) on August 21. 

The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, whereafter it was referred to a bench led by Justice JB Pardiwala, who ordered the NBEMS to provide the answer key, response sheets, and normalisation formula in May of this year.

The petitioners contend that the new answer key disclosure mechanism is "opaque, unintelligible, and incapable of meaningful verification," Times Now reported.

Under the corrective notice, NBEMS amended its previous rule, stating that responses and answer keys would henceforth only be shown using 'Question ID Numbers' from a master paper set. The petitioners contended that the exam's scrambled sequencing of questions and alternatives denied them a 'clear and candidate-wise mapping image of the questions actually tried by them'.

The petition read, "It frustrates the very object of publishing answer keys and responses, which is to enable candidates to cross-check their answers, raise objections against discrepancies, and ensure transparency in the evaluation of a high-stakes national examination."

It further argued that the Question-ID-only approach makes the disclosure "illusory and non-verifiable" and breaches Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by denying candidates a fair and transparent admission procedure.

The petition, filed by counsel Satyam Singh, stressed that candidates are not seeking re-evaluation of answer sheets; rather, their objection is limited to the manner and structure of disclosure.

Related Stories

No stories found.
logo
EdexLive
www.edexlive.com