The NEET-UG 2024 results have sparked widespread controversy, leading to multiple legal challenges and court interventions:
The Indian Medical Association's Junior Doctors' Network (IMA-JDN) has formally raised concerns regarding the NEET-UG 2024 examination by sending a letter to Prof. Pradeep Kumar Joshi, Chairperson of the National Testing Agency (NTA). The letter outlines several alleged irregularities and discrepancies observed in the recently conducted NEET examination, seeking proper clarification on the following points:
-
Statistical Anomalies in Scores: The IMA-JDN questioned the statistical credibility of some students scoring 718 and 719 marks, citing the lack of a defined logic for the grace marks awarded to these students. They also noted that no list has been shared detailing the distribution of grace marks.
-
Paper Leaks: Allegations of the NEET 2024 paper being leaked in multiple locations have been highlighted, with a pointed concern about the lack of action taken by the NTA in response to these reports.
-
Undisclosed Grace Marks Provision: The letter criticizes the NTA for introducing the provision of grace marks due to time wastage only after the examination, arguing that such information should have been disclosed in the exam's information bulletin beforehand.
-
Discrepancies in Scorecards: The IMA-JDN reported that many students received different marks on their scorecards compared to their OMR sheets, which were not explained by the grace marks, as these discrepancies occurred in centers not eligible for grace marks.
-
Unprecedented Number of Perfect Scores: The network expressed skepticism over 67 students achieving a perfect score of 720 out of 720, a significant deviation from the usual three to four students who attain such scores. Additionally, they noted that six to seven of these perfect scorers came from a single center in Haryana.
NEET-UG 2024 Results Controversy
The NEET-UG 2024 results have sparked widespread controversy, leading to multiple legal challenges and court interventions:
Calcutta High Court Demands NTA Response
The Calcutta High Court has ordered the NTA to respond to allegations of irregularities in the examination process. Justices Apurba Sinha Ray and Kausik Chanda are reviewing a public interest litigation (PIL) questioning the awarding of 718 or 719 marks to certain candidates. The NTA must file an affidavit within ten days explaining these discrepancies and how reservation policies were followed in preparing the merit list.
Delhi High Court on Grace Marks
The Delhi High Court is examining a petition against the NTA's decision to grant grace marks. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has allowed the NTA more time to gather instructions on the issue, with further hearings scheduled. Another related petition, challenging the final answer key for a physics question and compensatory time given to some candidates, will be heard on June 12.
Supreme Court Petition for Fresh Exams
A group of candidates has approached the Supreme Court, demanding fresh examinations due to alleged paper leaks and integrity concerns. The next hearing is set for July 8.
NTA's Clarifications
In response to the mounting controversies, the NTA has issued several statements:
-
Normalization Formula: The NTA explained that grace marks were awarded to compensate for lost time during disruptions at specific exam centers, based on a normalization formula approved by the Supreme Court.
-
Increased Number of High Scorers: The rise in perfect scores was attributed to a 15% increase in the number of candidates and adjustments in the answer key to accommodate multiple correct answers.
-
Transparency Measures: The NTA maintained that transparency was upheld throughout the exam process and denied any paper leaks. They acknowledged instances of impersonation and assured that appropriate legal actions were being taken.
As the legal proceedings continue, the controversy over the NEET-UG 2024 results remains unresolved, with significant implications for the future conduct and credibility of the examination.
Read more:
Comments
(1)
H
6 months ago
Report Abuse
Reply to Haji Babu