MP HC orders NEET-UG retest for candidates affected by power cuts at exam centres
The High Court cited Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which establishes the principle of equality and justice for all citizens, to give the petitioners relief.
The National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for admission to undergraduate courses in medicine was held on May 4, when parts of the state faced a power outage due to bad weather.
Justice Subodh Abhyankar of the high court's Indore bench reserved his decision last month after hearing arguments from all concerned parties on the petitions of several NEET-UG candidates.
Speaking to PTI on Tuesday, the petitioners' lawyer, Mridul Bhatnagar, said that the court's June 23 order will benefit 75 affected candidates who appeared for NEET-UG amid power cuts at exam centres in Indore and Ujjain.
The order stated that without any fault on their part, candidates were put into a disadvantageous position due to a power outage, which did not prevail in the other examination centre or even in the same centre where some students were sitting in favourable spots with sufficient natural light.
The court directed the NTA to conduct the examination as expeditiously as possible for the affected candidates and declare the results, making it clear that the petitioners' rank, based solely on their scores in the retest, should be considered.
"It is made clear that those persons who have filed the petition after the declaration of provisional answer key i.e., , 2025, shall not be entitled to get any benefit of this order," the court held.
The petitioners argued that their performance in the entrance exam was affected by a power outage amid bad weather on May 4, and they should be allowed to retake the test.
Pleading on behalf of the NTA, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta cited a committee report stating that alternate arrangements for power supply had been made in most examination centres and power supply was restored immediately after a complaint was made to the power distribution company.
Mehta had also submitted that candles, emergency lights, power backup and inverters were made at examination centres.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
13 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Former Minister Kimmane Ratnakar questions BJP leaders' allegiance to Indian Constitution
Former Minister and Congress leader Kimmane Ratnakar has questioned the BJP leaders' allegiance to the Indian Constitution, citing their devotion to M.S. Golwalkar's 'Bunch of Thoughts'. 'If BJP leaders accept the Constitution they have to reject the 'Bunch of Thoughts' written by Golwalkar of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. A person cannot accept both,' said Mr. Rathnakar in a press conference in Shivamogga on Thursday. 'The RSS is celebrating its 100th year. The BJP leaders, influenced by Golwalkar's ideas, have been trying to implement what the organisation stands for. However, the thoughts propagated by the leader are against the basic principles of the Indian Constitution,' he said. Holding a copy of Golwalkar's book, Mr. Ratnakar went through the excerpts from the book and questioned if the BJP leaders did support those ideas. Making a reference to the mention of Purusha Sukta in the book, he wanted to know if the BJP leaders would accept the depiction of the origin of four varnas – Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra. Referring to Golwalkar's thoughts favouring a unitary State and opposing the federal system, the former Minister stated that the views expressed in the book were completely opposite to the principles of the Constitution. 'Leaders of the BJP should clarify where they stand on these issues,' he wanted to know. Referring to Home Minister Amit Shah's recent comment that those who speak English in India would soon feel ashamed, Mr. Rathnakar stated that Shah's speech had its roots in Golwalkar's ideas. 'Shah did not make that statement all of a sudden. Golwalkar himself has advocated priority to Hindi over other languages,' he said. Further, he demanded BJP's response to RSS leader Dattatreya Hosabale's call to omit 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble of the Constitution. Displaying a copy of the BJP's constitution, the Congress leader stated that the party (BJP) announced to have faith and allegiance to principles of socialism and secularism. 'The words – 'socialism' and 'secularism' – were present in the party's constitution. They may have amended it now,' he commented. District Congress Committee president R. Prasanna Kumar, party spokesperson Ramesh Hegde and others were present at the press conference.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
In Sweden, Justice Surya Kant emphasises India's commitment to human rights, says ‘vital to respect diversity of approaches'
Underlining that India 'has historically demonstrated a strong commitment to human rights', Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant Monday said that 'it is somewhat paradoxical when countries with some of the most rigid immigration policies—and a documented tendency to resort to excessive use of force, even in response to minor infractions—position themselves as the foremost champions of human rights'. Speaking at the Embassy of India in Swedish capital Stockholm on the topic 'Human rights, the Indian Constitution and India as a resilient power', Justice Kant said, 'Such critiques, when unaccompanied by self-reflection or contextual understanding, undermine the very values they claim to uphold.' Pointing out that 'every nation crafts its human rights framework and crisis responses in accordance with its legal traditions, socio-political realities, and cultural ethos', he also said that 'it is vital to recognise and respect this diversity of approaches' while engaging in global conversations on human rights. Justice Kant said, 'Meaningful progress lies not in uniformity, but in mutual understanding, where each nation is afforded the dignity of its own path, shaped by both heritage and contemporary responsibility.' He said India 'has long been acquainted with the concept of human rights, with its principles deeply rooted in the teachings ingrained in our ancient texts, influencing our lives across centuries and epochs.' Citing a verse from the Rig Veda, he said it 'underscores a profound ethical ideal: that all human beings are equal, bound by a shared humanity, and ought to strive collectively for mutual upliftment and the common good'. Justice Kant said that in ancient India, dharmic law was regarded as above all human authority, which nobody, or no individual, regardless of their supremacy, could abolish. He said, 'The subsequent period of Islamic rule in India introduced a complex set of dynamics into the human rights discourse. The early phase, marked by invasions and conquests, was accompanied by widespread discriminatory practices and rights violations. However, in the later stages—particularly during the reigns of emperors Akbar and Jahangir—we begin to see the emergence of more progressive and nuanced governance.' Justice Kant added that 'it was perhaps during the British colonial period that India's human rights landscape descended into one of its darkest chapters'. The senior judge said that 'the colonial administration was marked by systematic economic exploitation, cultural marginalisation, and political repression' and added that 'there exist well-documented instances of grave human rights violations during' the period 'such as the Jallianwala Bagh massacre…the oppressive system of indigo cultivation in Champaran…' and 'the Bengal Famine of 1770'. 'Given these atrocities, it comes as no surprise that human rights were routinely denied to Indians, who were subjected to institutionalised discrimination and treated as inherently inferior. A range of laws and administrative measures were enacted not to uphold justice, but to serve imperial interests. In doing so, the British dismantled and disregarded India's indigenous legal and political traditions, replacing them with frameworks that effectively excluded the majority of Indians from meaningful participation in social, political, and economic life,' he added. Speaking of human rights in the Indian context, he said the country's judiciary 'has played a pivotal role' in interpreting and expanding the scope of fundamental rights, thereby transforming constitutional guarantees into a dynamic and evolving human rights framework. 'Through progressive jurisprudence, the courts have consistently broadened the ambit of these rights to encompass a wider range of protections that align with globally recognised human rights standards,' he said. Pointing to the role of institutions like the National Human Rights Commission and State Human Rights Commissions, Justice Kant said, 'In practice… function as vital conduits for bringing instances of abuse or administrative apathy to the fore, particularly where traditional avenues of redress may be inaccessible or delayed.'
Hindustan Times
4 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Tharoor's latest on Cong: Cites Sanjay Gandhi's excesses in ‘Emergency lessons' article
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, in a new article that takes a critical look at the past, has written about lessons from the Emergency imposed by the then PM Indira Gandhi. Published around the 50th anniversary of the Emergency, Tharoor's article specifically cited how her son Sanjay Gandhi's actions were an example of cruelty in the name of discipline. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor saying something to Rahul Gandhi (back to camera) at the Parliament in New Delhi.(PTI File) He mentioned 'the forced vasectomy campaigns led by Gandhi's son, Sanjay, and concentrated in poorer and rural areas, where coercion and violence were used to meet arbitrary targets'. "Slum demolitions, carried out with ruthless efficiency in urban centers like New Delhi, rendered thousands homeless, with little to no concern for their welfare." the Thiruvananthapuram MP wrote in the Malayalam daily Deepika, PTI reported. He put up a link to an English version of article on X too. The Emergency should not be remembered merely as a dark chapter in India's history, but that its lessons must be fully understood, said Tharoor, who is a member of the Congress Working Committee, the party's top body. Timing crucial He has not been on the most cordial terms with his party for a while now for some of his actions. Among the most recent sticking points were his praise for PM Narendra Modi's global diplomacy and a measured answer on the RSS's view of the Indian Constitution. The former global diplomat, who was a minister in Manmohan Singh's Congress-led UPA regime, was also chosen by the BJP-led NDA government to be a leader of Operation Sindoor outreach delegations sent to foreign countries to present India's position after cross-border hostilities with Pakistan. The party had reservations about not being asked to nominate members instead. Tharoor was the only candidate against Mallikarjun Kharge for the Congress presidentship in 2022, in which the party got its first non-Gandhi-family chief in over two decades after Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi's stints. 'Let it be a reminder' In his article on Thursday, Tharoor recalled the dark era of the Emergency that lasted from June 25, 1975, to March 21, 1977, followed by an election in which Indira Gandhi lost too, and the Janata Party came to power. Sanjay Gandhi died in a plane crash some time later, and Indira's other son, Rajiv, became her successor but was assassinated. That brought his wife Sonia into politics, followed by son Rahul and daughter Priyanka. Rahul Gandhi, and the Congress, have called the Emergency a mistake. Tharoor wrote that it should 'serve as a lasting reminder to people everywhere' that democracy is not something to be taken lightly, and it must be constantly nurtured and preserved. 'Stronger democracy now' He stressed that today's India is not the India of 1975: 'We are a more self-confident, more developed, and in many ways a more robust democracy. Yet the lessons of the Emergency remain alarmingly relevant." He added, 'The temptation to centralize power, to silence critics, and to bypass constitutional safeguards can emerge in many forms, often cloaked in the rhetoric of national interest or stability. In this sense, the Emergency should serve as a potent warning: democratic stalwarts must be eternally vigilant.'
