No need to re-conduct NEET-UG 2025, affirms Division Bench of Madras High Court
The Division Bench comprising Justices J. Nisha Banu and M. Jothiraman dismissed a writ appeal filed jointly by a group of candidates by concurring with the submissions of Additional Solicitor General AR.L. Sundaresan that the power disruption had no significant impact in the performance of the petitioners in the test.
The Bench upheld Justice C. Kumarappan's June 6 decision to not order re-conduct of NEET-UG 2025 and said, the single judge had rightly concluded that any court order for conduct of re-examination would severely affect the prospects of more than two million candidates.
While challenging the single judge's order, the appellants had contended that there was complete breakdown of exam conditions at the centres where there was power outage due to heavy rainfall and therefore, the candidates in those centres had lost the advantage of writing the exams in conditions on a par with those in other centres.
However, Mr. Sundaresan produced CCTV footage from the examination centres before the Division Bench to show that the examination halls had large windows with glass panes which allowed ambient daylight to enter the rooms and that there was highly negligible disruption due to the rains and power outage.
He also pointed out one of the candidates in the examination centre in question had answered 179 out of 180 questions and five other candidates had answered 140 out of 180 questions. He said, there was no difference in the performance of candidates who suffered power outage at their centres and others.
He further stated the NTA had constituted an independent expert committee for conducting an on-ground assessment to find out if there was any impact on candidates' performance due to the power outage at some centres and that the committee had conducted a statistical analysis before giving a categorical finding that there was no such impact.
Finding force in his submissions, the Division Bench wrote: 'This court is of the opinion that it is crucial to uphold the integrity of the educational assessments in conducting examinations and this court cannot sit in an appellate jurisdiction against the considered decision of the speaking order passed by the NTA, after field verification of examination centres and statistical analysis by an independent expert committee with no affiliation to the NTA, unless such decision is demonstrated to be manifestly arbitrary, mala fide or illegal.'
Taking note that as many as 22 lakh candidates had appeared for NEET-UG 2025 and that the entire rank list would get disrupted if a re-examination was ordered for select candidates, the Bench said: 'Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned (under challenge) and the writ appeal lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
Lower judiciary treated like ‘shudras', ‘les misérables', High Court judges like ‘savarnas': Madhya Pradesh HC quashes termination of district judge
In a scathing comment on judicial power structures, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has likened the relationship between the High Court and the District Judiciary to a caste system, observing that judges in the lower judiciary are treated like 'shudras' and 'les misérables', while High Court judges function with the entitlement of 'savarnas'. The French term, 'les misérables', translates to 'the miserable ones' in English and is commonly used to refer to the poor and marginalised, as in Victor Hugo's French novel of the same name. A Division Bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Dinesh Kumar Paliwal made the observations on July 14 while quashing the termination of former Additional District and Sessions Judge Jagat Mohan Chaturvedi. He was dismissed in 2014 after passing divergent bail orders in cases linked to the Vyapam scam. The court said the judicial officer had suffered 'gross injustice' and ordered the restoration of his pensionary benefits. It also imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on the state for the 'hardships he and his family were subjected to' and 'the humiliation in society that he had to face, only on account of passing judicial orders, without an iota of material coming on record to even establish corruption even on the anvil of preponderance of probability'. Speaking on the entrenched hierarchy in the judiciary, the Bench observed, 'The relationship between District Judiciary and the High Court in the state is not based on mutual respect for each other, but one where a sense of fear and inferiority is consciously instilled by one on the subconscious of the other. At a subliminal level, the penumbra of the caste system manifests in the judicial structure in this state where those in the High Court are the savarnas and the shudras are the les misérables of the District Judiciary.' Describing the dynamic between the High Court and the lower courts, the judges said, 'The dismal relationship between the Judges of the High Court and the Judges of the District Judiciary is one between a feudal lord and serf.' 'The body language of the Judges of the District Judiciary when they greet a Judge of the High Court stops short of grovelling before the High Court Judge, making the Judges of the District Judiciary the only identifiable species of invertebrate mammals,' they said. The Bench further added, 'Instances of the judges of the District Judiciary personally attending to Judges of the High Court (as desired by them) on railway platforms and waiting on them with refreshments, are commonplace, thus perpetuating a colonial decadence with a sense of entitlement.' Judges of the district judiciary deputed to work at the High Court registry 'are almost never offered a seat by the Judges of the High Court, and on a rare occasion when they are, they are hesitant to sit down before the High Court Judge,' the Bench said. The court also observed that the 'subjugation and enslavement of the psyche of the Judges of the District Judiciary is complete and irreversible, so it seems'. 'An overbearing High Court, ever willing to excoriate the District Judiciary for the most innocuous of its errors, ensures that District Judiciary is kept under perpetual and morbid fear of punishment,' it said. 'The fear of the District Judiciary is understandable. They have families, children who go to school, parents undergoing treatment, a home to be built, savings to be accumulated and when the High Court terminates his service abruptly…he and his entire family are out on the streets with no pension and the stigma of facing a society that suspects his integrity,' the court said. The court observed that a 'District Judiciary which is compelled to work perpetually under this fear cannot dispense justice and instead shall dispense with justice'. It added, 'All this adds up to the passive subjugation of the District Judiciary, leaving it psychologically emaciated, which ultimately reflects in their judicial work where bails are not granted in even the most deserving cases, convictions are recorded in the absence of evidence… All this in the name of saving their job, for which the Petitioner in this case suffered, for thinking and doing differently.'
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Thousands in limbo, await Telangana domicile policy relief
Hyderabad: Thousands of students from Telangana may benefit if the state govt relaxes its current domicile policy, which requires students to have studied Classes 9 to 12 within the state to qualify for undergraduate admissions under the local quota in engineering and medical colleges. T his four-year study rule, introduced last year, has created challenges for students seeking coaching in other states. To maintain eligibility, many students are forced to return to Telangana just to write board exams, often while studying in coaching centres elsewhere. Faculty say students from both Telangana and Andhra Pradesh are juggling between states for exams and coaching to retain their local status. "Since last year, we've seen repeated requests from students wanting to write exams in one state while studying in another. They're being forced into this stressful routine just to preserve eligibility for NEET or EAPCET. This four-year requirement is creating unnecessary hurdles," said V Ashok Kumar, dean of academic affairs at Narayana Educational Society. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad On Wednesday, the Supreme Court criticised the Telangana govt's domicile policy, saying it was out of touch with reality. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like TV providers are furious: this gadget gives you access to all channels Techno Mag Learn More Undo The court asked the state to ensure that all students whose parents are domiciled in Telangana should be eligible for local quota seats, regardless of where they completed Class 11 and 12. The matter will be heard again on July 29. "This issue cropped up even last year. Many students weren't treated as locals because they didn't study Class 10 or Intermediate in Telangana. While the govt followed procedure while implementing the policy, it remains to be seen if they are open to amending it," said K Mahesh Kumar, president of Healthcare Reforms Doctors Association (HRDA). Officials from the higher education department also acknowledged the limitations of the current policy. "In the long run, this kind of restriction won't work. Students should have the freedom to study anywhere. The four-year rule is curbing that choice. We need more flexible, inclusive policies," said V Balakista Reddy, chairman of Telangana State Council of Higher Education .
The Hindu
9 hours ago
- The Hindu
Parliament security breach case: Delhi HC seeks police reply on bail plea of two accused
The Delhi High Court on Thursday asked Delhi Police to respond to a bail plea of two accused in the December 2023 Parliament security breach case. During the hearing, the counsel for the accused – Sagar Sharma and Manoranjan D – told a Division Bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Shalinder Kaur that the act of opening smoke canisters inside Parliament while sloganeering 'did not amount to terrorist act' as the smoke was not obnoxious and the intention of the accused was to only 'highlight unemployment and not create terror'. The Bench, however, remarked, 'The best way to create terror in India is to disrupt Parliament. You disrupted Parliament.' It asked the Delhi Police to file a status report on Mr. Sharma's bail plea and posted the hearing for October 8, when it would also take up Mr. Manoranjan D's petition, for which it had issued a notice earlier. The duo had challenged a trial court's order denying them bail. Mr. Sharma contended that he was entitled to be released on bail on the grounds of parity with the other two accused who were already on bail. Mr. Manoranjan D called the allegations against him 'vague' and alleged that Delhi Police had 'wrongly attributed' the charge under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act against him. The Bench said there was no parity since those granted bail had protested outside Parliament, whereas the present accused were inside it. In a major security breach on the anniversary of the 2001 Parliament terror attack on December 13, 2023, accused Mr. Sharma and Mr. Manoranjan D allegedly jumped into the Lok Sabha chamber from the public gallery during Zero Hour, opened canisters filled with yellow gas, and sloganeered before some MPs overpowered them. Around the same time, the other two accused – Amol Shinde and Neelam Azad – allegedly opened coloured gas canisters outside the Parliament premises and raised slogans. The High Court granted bail to Ms. Azad and another accused, Mahesh Kumawat, in July.
