2024 INSC 553

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

LexStreak turns the Supreme Court's output into a five-minute daily read for advocates — plain-language headnotes, the questions each judgment settles, and the full text when you need it.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

WPC 335/2024 2024 INSC 553

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Writ Petition (Civil) No 335 of 2024

Vanshika Yadav …Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and Others …Respondents

WITH

Writ Petition (Civil) No.362 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.369 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.368 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.431 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.379 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.377 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.376 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.375 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.425 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.401 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.415 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.407 of 2024

WPC 335/2024

Writ Petition (Civil) No.412 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.383 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.419 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.406 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.403 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.398 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.414 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.423 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.404 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.427 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.441 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.420 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.430 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.446 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.410 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.382 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.381 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.394 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.384 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.389 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.417 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.393 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.435 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No.28729 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.1741 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.449 of 2024 Writ Petition (Civil) No.392 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1659 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1597 of 2024

WPC 335/2024

Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1600 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil)No.1602 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1596 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1808 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1741 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1737 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1735 of 2024 Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1730 of 2024

ORDER

1 The National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (UG) 1 2024 examination was

conducted by the National Testing Agency 2 on 5 May 2024. The results were

declared on 4 June 2024.

2 The examination was conducted at 4,750 centres comprised within 571 cities,

besides 14 cities overseas. About 23,33,297 candidates appeared for the

examination. They are competing for 1.08 lac medical admissions at the under-

graduate level, of which approximately 56,000 seats are in government hospitals

while the balance 52,000 seats are in privately managed institutions.

3 The 50th percentile represents the cut-off for qualification. The examination

consists of 180 questions, each carrying four marks, thus making a total of 720

1 “NEET (UG)” 2 “NTA”

WPC 335/2024

marks overall. One negative mark is assigned for an incorrect answer. Based on

the result of the NEET (UG) 2024, the 50th percentile has worked out to 164 marks

out of 720. Candidates who have attained this threshold are eligible to be

considered for admission but are not guaranteed admission into the MBBS

program. Seats are allocated both among the unreserved category of students

and the reserved category, consisting of candidates belonging to Scheduled

Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Economically Weaker

Sections.

4 In this batch of cases, the petitioners assert that a direction should be issued for

convening a re-test on the ground that (i) there was a leakage of the question

paper; and (ii) there are systemic deficiencies in the modalities envisaged for

the conduct of the examination.

5 The submission which has been urged on behalf of the petitioners is that the leak

which took place in the course of the NEET (UG) examination is systemic in

nature and, coupled with the structural deficiencies in the conduct of the

examination, the appropriate course of action in view of the previous decisions

of this Court, including in Tanvi Sarwal vs Central Board of Secondary Education

and Others 3 and Sachin Kumar and Others vs Delhi Subordinate Service

Selection Board (DSSSB) and Others, 4 is to direct a re-test.

3 (2015) 6 SCC 573 4 (2021) 4 SCC 631

WPC 335/2024

6 By an interim order dated 8 July 2024, this Court called for disclosures on affidavit

by the NTA; the Union of India; and by the Central Bureau of Investigation. 5

While flagging the principal issues in contention, the CBI has been involved in

the process because the FIRs which were registered in Delhi, Gujarat, Rajasthan,

Jharkhand, Maharashtra and Bihar have been transferred to it for investigation.

In the earlier order, this Court noted that it would have to scrutinize the following

aspects on the basis of the data which would emerge on the record, namely:

(i) Whether the alleged breach took place at a systemic level;

(ii) Whether the breach is of a nature which affects the integrity of the entire

examination process; and

(iii) Whether it is possible to segregate the beneficiaries of the fraud from the

untainted students.

7 Directions were consequently issued to the above agencies of the Union to

make specific disclosures on the issues which have been highlighted in the

previous order.

8 Arguments have been heard over four days. We have had the benefit of

considering the submissions urged on behalf of the petitioners, the Union of India

5 “CBI”

WPC 335/2024

and the NTA. Mr Y V Krishna, Additional Director, CBI has in the course of the

proceedings apprised the Court on the status of the investigation.

9 Arguments have been concluded and judgment has been reserved.

10 There is an urgent need to provide certainty and finality to a dispute which

affects the careers of over two million students. Hence, it is imperative that the

final conclusions of the Court be recorded at the present stage. The reasons for

the ultimate conclusions will follow later.

11 We proceed to record the essential conclusions in the following terms:

(i) The fact that a leak of the NEET (UG) 2024 paper took place at Hazaribagh

in the State of Jharkhand and at Patna in the State of Bihar is not in

dispute;

(ii) Following the transfer of the investigation to it, the CBI has filed its status

reports dated 10 July 2024, 17 July 2024 and 21 July 2024. The disclosures by

the CBI indicate that the investigation is continuing. The CBI has indicated

that at the present stage, the material which has emerged during the

course of the investigation would indicate that about 155 students drawn

from the examination centres at Hazaribagh and Patna appear to be the

beneficiaries of the fraud;

(iii) Since the investigation by the CBI has not attained finality at the present

WPC 335/2024

point of time, this Court had in its previous order required the Union

Government to indicate whether trends in regard to the existence of

abnormalities can be deduced through data analytics on the basis of the

results emanating from 4,750 centres situated in 571 cities. Pursuant to the

directions of the Court, the Union Government has produced a report of

Indian Institute of Technology, 6 Madras. The objection of the petitioners to

the report of IIT, Madras on the grounds of alleged bias would be

considered in the course of the reasoned judgment which will follow. At this

stage, in order to obviate any controversy, the Court has independently

scrutinized the data which has been placed on the record by the NTA;

(iv) At the present stage, there is an absence of material on the record to lead

to the conclusion that the entire result of the examination stands vitiated or

that there was a systemic breach in the sanctity of the examination;

(v) Added to the absence of conclusive material on the record at the present

stage, the data which has been produced on the record city-wise and

centre-wise and the comparison of data for the years 2022, 2023 and 2024

are not indicative of a systemic leak of the question paper impacting the

sanctity of the examination;

(vi) In arriving at the ultimate conclusion, the Court is guided by the well-settled

6 “IIT”

WPC 335/2024

test of whether it is possible to segregate tainted students from those

whose candidature does not suffer from any taint. If the investigation

reveals the involvement of an increased number of beneficiaries over and

above those who are suspects at the present stage, action shall be

pursued against every student found to be involved in wrong doing at any

stage, notwithstanding the completion of the counselling process. No

student who is revealed to have engaged in acts of fraud or to have been

the beneficiary of malpractice would be entitled to claim a vested right or

interest in the continuation of the admission in the future by virtue of the

findings in this judgment; and

(vii) Directing a fresh NEET (UG) to be conducted for the present year would be

replete with serious consequences for over two million students who have

appeared in the examination. Adopting such a course of action would, in

particular, (i) lead to a disruption of the admission schedule for the

commencement of medical courses, setting back the entire process by

several months; (ii) lead to cascading effects on the course of medical

education; (iii) impact the availability of qualified medical professionals in

the future; and (iv) cause a serious element of disadvantage to students

belonging to marginalized communities and weaker sections for whom

reservation has been made in the allocation of seats.

12 Ordering the cancellation of the entire NEET (UG) 2024 examination is not

WPC 335/2024

justified on the application of the settled tests which have been propounded in

the decisions of this Court or on the basis of the data and material available on

the record.

13 Apart from this, it is necessary to deal with another contention of the petitioners.

One of the questions in the course of the NEET (UG) 2024 was in the following

terms:

“Given below are two statements:

Statement I: Atoms are electrically neutral as they contain equal number of positive and negative charges.

Statement II: Atoms of each element are stable and emit their characteristic spectrum.

In the light of the above statements, choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below:

(1) Statement I is incorrect but Statement II is correct.

(2) Both Statement I and Statement II are correct.

(3) Both Statement I and Statement II are incorrect.

(4) Statement I is correct but Statement II is incorrect.”

14 We have not indicated the number of the question since the number of the

question as well of the options is likely to vary in different series of the question

papers in view of the procedure which is followed to preserve the integrity of the

process.

15 Initially, the answer key which was prepared by the NTA indicated that the

WPC 335/2024

fourth option extracted above was the correct answer. Subsequently, on

representations submitted to NTA, a decision was taken to the effect that both

the second as well as the fourth options would be treated to be the correct

answers.

16 By an order of this Court dated 22 July 2024, the Director of IIT, Delhi was

requested to constitute a three-member committee to submit its opinion on

which of the options noted above would be the correct answer to the above

question. The Director and Professor of the Department of Energy Science &

Engineering at IIT, Delhi has in a report dated 23 July 2024, indicated that a

three-member Committee from the Department of Physics comprising of (i)

Professor Pradipta Ghosh; (ii) Professor Aditya Narain Agnihotri; and (iii) Professor

Sankalpa Ghosh was constituted for that purpose.

17 The expert team constituted by the Director of IIT, Delhi has opined that option

(4), as extracted above, is the correct answer. In order to obviate any

ambiguity, option (4) which is to be treated as the correct answer is set out

below:

“(4) Statement I is correct but Statement II is incorrect.”

18 The expert determination by the team constituted by the IIT, Delhi leaves no

manner of ambiguity in regard to the correct option. This was, in fact, initially the

only option which was treated as the correct answer by NTA. Options (2) and (4)

WPC 335/2024

are mutually exclusive and both cannot stand together.

19 We accept the report of IIT, Delhi. Accordingly, NTA shall revise the result of the

NEET (UG) 2024 on the basis that option (4), as extracted above, represents the

only correct answer to the question. NTA is directed to update the ranks of all

candidates.

20 During the course of the hearing, the Court had been apprised of the fact that

NTA was conducting a special test for 1,563 students in supersession of the

compensatory marks which were awarded. The 1,563 students were given the

option of either appearing for the special test or in the alternative, to opt for

their original marks without the addition of compensatory marks. NTA is

permitted to act following the test which was held.

21 The principal issue which has been urged before the Court relates to the sanctity

of the NEET (UG) 2024 examination and whether the process should be

scrapped and a fresh test should be reconvened. Having answered the

question in the above terms, it needs to be clarified that if any student, including

in the present batch, has an individual grievance not bearing on the issues

which have been resolved by this judgment, it would be open to them to pursue

their rights and remedies in accordance with law, including by moving the

jurisdictional High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution. However, before

moving the High Court for the grant of relief, the petitioners would have to seek

WPC 335/2024

the withdrawal of their petitions before this Court, if any have been filed.

22 The Union Government has constituted a seven-member Expert Committee

chaired by Dr K Radhakrishnan, former Chairman, ISRO consisting of the

following members:

(i) Dr K Radhakrishnan, Chairman

(ii) Dr Randeep Guleria, Member

(iii) Prof B J Rao, Member

(iv) Prof Ramamurthy K, Member

(v) Shri Pankaj Bansal, Member

(vi) Prof Aditya Mittal, Member

(vii) Shri Govind Jaiswal, Member Secretary

23 The Committee will abide by such further directions as may be issued by this

Court in its final judgment and order in regard to the areas which should be

enquired into by it so as to ensure that (i) the process of conducting the NEET

(UG) and other examinations falling within the remit of the NTA is duly

strengthened; and (ii) the instances which came to light during the course of the

present year are not repeated in the future.

24 The transfer petitions at the instance of the NTA or any other party raising the

WPC 335/2024

issue as regards the validity of NEET (UG) 2024 examination are allowed. The

resulting transferred cases shall stand disposed of in terms of the above

directions subject to the clarification that individual grievances, if any, that

remain, may be addressed before the jurisdictional High Court. The interlocutory

applications raising individual grievances are similarly permitted to be withdrawn

with liberty reserved in the above terms.

T.P. (c) No. 1602 of 2024

25 Counsel for the petitioner in TP (Civil) No 1602 of 2024 seeks permission of the

Court to amend the petition. Permission is granted to amend the petition during

the course of the week.

Writ Petition (Civil) No 404 of 2024, Writ Petition (Civil) No 381 of 2024, Writ Petition (Civil) No 398 of 2024 & Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No 28729 of 2024

26 Counsel for the petitioners seek the permission of the Court to withdraw the

Petitions with liberty to pursue their rights and remedies in accordance with law,

including by moving the jurisdictional High Courts under Article 226 of the

Constitution.

27 The Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought.

WPC 335/2024

IA No 146158 of 2024 & IA No 146162 of 2024 In Writ Petition (Civil) No 379 of 2024

28 Mr Kunal Cheema, counsel for the applicants seeks the permission of the Court

to withdraw the Interlocutory Applications with liberty to pursue their rights and

remedies in accordance with law.

29 The Interlocutory Applications are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought.

….....…...….......…………………..CJI. [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud]

..…....…........……………….…........J. [J B Pardiwala]

..…....…........……………….…........J. [Manoj Misra]

New Delhi; July 23, 2024 CKB