Medical aspirants flag marks inflation in NEET, demand re-exam; NTA denies irregularities
New Delhi (PTI): Several aspirants of the medical entrance exam NEET have alleged inflation of marks which led to a record 67 candidates bagging the top rank, including six from the same exam centre.
The National Testing Agency (NTA), however, denied any irregularities and said the changes made in the NCERT textbooks and grace marks for losing time at the examination centres are some of the reasons behind the students scoring higher marks.
The results announced by NTA on Wednesday evening saw 67 students sharing rank one, including six from same examination centre in Haryana.
"After the NEET exam, now the NEET result is also in controversy. After the NEET results were declared, questions are being raised on six students from the same centre getting 720 out of 720 marks. Apart from this, many other irregularities related to the NEET exam have also come to light," the Congress wrote on X.
"First due to paper leak and now due to result error, the future of lakhs of youth of the country is getting ruined. It is clear that this government cannot get any paper done without leaking it. Sir claims to stop wars in foreign countries but he is unable to even stop paper leaks in the country," the party added.
Detailing the reason behind inflation of marks, the NTA said it received representations raising concerns about the loss of time during conduct of the examination.
"Such cases and representations were considered by NTA and the normalisation formula, which has been devised and adopted by Supreme Court, vide its Judgment dated 13.06.2018, was implemented to address the loss of time faced by the candidates of NEET (UG) 2024.
"The loss of examination time was ascertained and such candidates were compensated with grace marks. So, there marks can be 718 or 719 also," it said in a statement.
Asked about the allegations of unclear implementation of grace marks, a senior NTA official told PTI that the question paper was prepared using a new NCERT textbook. However, some students had old NCERT textbooks.
"We received a representation on this issue as well due to which NTA had to assign five marks to all students who had marked one of the two options. Because of this reason, marks of a total of 44 students increased from 715 to 720, which resulted in an increased number of toppers," the official said.
After several court cases and representations raising concerns over loss of time during exam were received, a committee was formed to look into the matter, the official said, adding that the committee went through everything and the loss of time was ascertained.
"Such candidates were compensated with grace marks. Therefore, the marks of students at some centres are high because it is likely they all benefitted from grace marks," the official added.
According to experts, the mark inflation in NEET UG 2024 result is expected to make securing a spot in medical school this year more difficult. Some aspiring students have turned to online platforms to demand the cancellation of the results and a re-examination.
"Several students are raising some valid points. How come students with same sequence roll number scored the same marks. This is a serious issue.
"We don't want such doctors to serve our country. This must be investigated," said Anubha Shrivastava, a lawyer and president of India Wide Parents Association.
An aspirant took to X and said, "67 students scoring 720 out of 720 marks in the results released after the NEET exam paper leak raises suspicion. This is playing with the future of lakhs of candidates of the country, due to which there is anger among the students. The government should conduct a high-level investigation".
Another X user Nitish Rajput said NTA awarded grace marks according to the court order but the students argue this sudden decision is unjust as the agency has not mentioned any methodology to award these 'grace marks'.
"Calls for transparency in the process have only grown louder. The controversy for the NTA is brewing as lakhs of students demand re-examination citing lack of clarity in NTA's explanations and have even pushed for the Supreme Court’s intervention. Grace marks given for lost exam time have raised concerns of fairness," he added.
The entrance exam was conducted on May 5 at 4,750 centres in 571 cities including 14 cities abroad.
The NTA had on May 5 claimed that the distribution of wrong question papers at an exam centre in Rajasthan led to some candidates walking out with the papers. The agency had denied any leak of the question paper.
A day later, the NTA had reiterated that the reports claiming question paper leak in the medical entrance exam NEET-UG are "completely baseless and without any ground", and every question paper has been accounted for.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
