0
0
The ongoing legal tussle over the transparency and fairness of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test – Postgraduate (NEET PG) has once again left thousands of medical aspirants in suspense. The Supreme Court, which was scheduled to hear multiple petitions on May 20 challenging the exam’s two-shift format and alleged lack of transparency, has postponed the hearing to later this week, with reports suggesting a new date of either May 22 or May 23.
Endless Cycle of Legal Delays
This latest deferment comes as the June 15 NEET PG examination date looms, intensifying uncertainty for candidates who have already endured years of legal wrangling. The bench prioritized arguments in the unrelated Waqf case, pushing back the NEET PG matter—a move that has become all too familiar for those following the case.
The petitions, filed by Dr Ishika Jain, the United Doctors’ Front (UDF), Dr Aditi, and others, have faced repeated postponements. Some related cases have been pending since 2021, contributing to a complex legal backlog that remains unresolved. Advocate Tanvi Dubey, representing some petitioners, defended the judicial process, emphasizing that the court must hear all sides before delivering a comprehensive judgment. She noted, “This is an extremely important issue that affects both present candidates and future aspirants of NEET PG. This will yield a very comprehensive judgment. It will take time, but it’s not being delayed without reason. There will likely be a better outcome from this judgment”.
Core Issues: Transparency and the Two-Shift Format
At the heart of the legal challenge are concerns about the lack of transparency in the NEET PG evaluation process and the fairness of the two-shift exam format. Petitioners argue that the National Board of Examinations (NBE) does not disclose question papers, answer keys, or response sheets, leaving students unable to verify their scores or understand the basis of their evaluation. Advocate Satyam Singh Rajput, representing the UDF, criticized the NBE’s reliance on a normalisation formula previously discarded by AIIMS Delhi, questioning its continued use for both the 2024 and 2025 exams.
The petitioners also highlight that students have no right to judicial review or access to their own exam materials, which they argue constitutes a violation of fundamental constitutional rights. Rajput stated, “In essence, students do not have the right to judicial review. They do not have enough information to properly examine the evaluation process. There is simply no mechanism for transparency”.
Systemic Problems and Uncertain Outcomes
Both legal representatives and student groups agree that these issues reflect deeper systemic problems in the conduct of national-level examinations in India. “If you look back at the past four years, virtually every exam conducted by the government has faced similar issues. This pattern itself is very questionable,” Rajput observed.
As the Supreme Court prepares to revisit the matter later this week, the medical community remains anxious. The outcome could set a precedent for transparency and fairness in high-stakes examinations, but for now, aspirants are left waiting—caught in a cycle of legal delays and administrative opacity.
Disclaimer: This article is based on information available as of May 21, 2025, and reflects ongoing legal proceedings regarding NEET PG. The situation may evolve as the Supreme Court hears the matter later this week. Readers are advised to consult official sources and court updates for the latest developments.
Citations:
