Madras HC dismisses appeal against order on NEET UG 2025 re-examination
S Sai Priya and 11 others had preferred the appeal against a June 6 order where the HC had dismissed a batch of petitions that sought to restrain the National Testing Agency (NTA) from declaring the results.
In their petitions, Priya and other students also sought a direction to the NTA to conduct re-examination for candidates, who had experienced power outages at four centres in Chennai, where they appeared for the examination.
On Thursday, a Division bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice M Jothiraman dismissed the appeal.
'It is to be noted that the integrity of the exam is particularly ensured through human supervision including the presence of the Centre Superintendent, Invigilators, NTA appointed Observers and City Coordinator.
All these officials have examined and confirmed that the examination was conducted smoothly. A factual enquiry was undertaken by the NTA and the enquiry was conducted with regard to the field verification through the reports of the examination functionaries and an independent statistical analysis of candidate performance data,' the bench said.
It said statistical analysis was conducted by an independent expert committee and it carried out an analysis based on anonymised data relating to the average number of questions attempted by the candidates at the said centre, and comparisons with other centres in Thiruvallur District are statistically comparable across the centres in the district, where the examination was conducted smoothly.
'This analysis found no statistically significant difference in the number of questions attempted, confirming that the alleged power outage did not materially impact candidate performance. Furthermore, NEET (UG) 2025 is a time sensitive and large scale national examination,' the court said.
It was 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 centre 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.'
'In such circumstances, if any re-examination is permitted, the same would severely affect more than two million candidates. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned and the writ appeal lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. In the result, this writ appeal stands dismissed,' the court ruled.
Meanwhile, the Madhya Pradesh High Court on Tuesday stayed the retest of candidates affected by power cuts at exam centres in Indore and Ujjain during NEET UG held on May 4 for admission to undergraduate medical courses.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Bathroom to courtroom: Man attends virtual hearing from toilet, Gujarat HC orders contempt proceedings
The Gujarat High Court has initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against a man for attending a virtual hearing while sitting on a toilet seat. The incident occurred on June 20 when Justice Nirzar S. Desai was hearing a case. A video of it soon went viral on social media platforms. A division bench of Justices A.S. Supehia and R.T. Vachhani passed an order on June 30 directing the HC registry to "register a suo motu contempt proceedings against the person who is seen in the video". In its 'oral order' which was uploaded on July 3, the HC bench directed the Registrar of Information and Technology to inform the Court "about the mechanism to stop contumacious litigants in participating in the live streaming proceedings, since it is also noticed by us that such disorderly and uncontrolled behaviour has become frequent". "Registry shall issue the notice to the contemnor as to why he should not be prosecuted and punished for committing Contempt of Court as defined under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. A suo motu proceeding shall be listed after a period of two weeks," the bench said in the order. "The infamous video tarnishing the image of this court is widely circulated in social media and it requires to be immediately banned and deleted," the bench further said. Answering nature's call during proceedings In the video, a man wearing a yellow t-shirt can be seen logging in using a mobile phone, with the name on the screen identifying him as 'Samad Battery'. Shockingly, the video shows he had been sitting on a toilet seat and answering nature's call while he attended the proceedings through video link. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the Gujarat High Court has allowed both lawyers and litigants to join through the virtual mode, and the proceedings of each hearing are broadcast live via the court's YouTube channel. The one minute-long video showed that the man, later identified as Abdul Samad, had kept the mobile phone on the floor of the toilet with the camera facing him. After finishing his business in the toilet, he picked up the phone and left. Justice Desai apparently did not notice his actions or the surroundings. The same person, wearing wireless earphones, can be seen logging in again later in the livestream, sitting in a room and waiting for his turn. After nearly 10 minutes, Justice Desai asked his name and he identified himself as Abdul Samad, a resident of Kim village of Surat and the complainant in a case of assault. His lawyers informed the court that Mr. Samad had recently lodged a complaint of assault against two persons in Kim, but both the parties have arrived at a compromise. Hearing the petition filed by the two accused seeking to quash the First Information Report, Justice Desai asked Samad if he consented to it. He told the court he had no objection, following which Justice Desai granted the accused's plea.
The Hindu
5 hours ago
- The Hindu
High Court notices to Telangana govt
Telangana High Court on Friday (July 4, 2025) issued notices to the State government in a PIL petition over failure of officials to enforce the provisions of Telangana Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act-1973. The bench of Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara instructed the State government to file its response within four weeks over the issues raised in the PIL plea. Singur Jalasadhana Committee (Alladurg of Medak) president Kanchari Brahmam wrote a letter to the High Court stating that some individuals were floating companies and buying lands on large scale. These huge agricultural land masses were being kept idle, defeating the purpose of using them for agricultural production or growing crops for food production. The said special Act was supposed to check such misuse of land but the authorities were not acting upon the issue. The High Court converted the letter into PIL plea and issued notices to the government.
Hindustan Times
6 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
HC orders demolition of illegal 5-building complex in Uran, SC grants interim stay
Mumbai: Observing that there was 'overwhelming evidence of material suppression, misleading actions, and apparent collusion' between property developers in Uran and officers of the City and Industrial Development Corporation (Cidco), the Bombay high court recently ordered the Navi Mumbai planning authority to demolish an illegally constructed complex of five buildings in the Chanje village in Uran taluka in four weeks. HC orders demolition of illegal 5-building complex in Uran, SC grants interim stay The village, about 15 minutes away from the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Authority, has had improved connectivity with Mumbai since the inauguration of the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link, otherwise known as Atal Setu, last year. 'We find this to be yet another case where the authorities have been complicit in promoting and tolerating illegal and unauthorised constructions, despite being consistently alerted through written complaints from citizens,' a division bench of justices AS Gadkari and Kamal Khata observed in their June 20 order. However, the respondents in the case—land owner Vivek Deshmukh and the developer, Vinayak Developers—approached the Supreme Court, which on June 27 granted an interim stay on the high court's order until it hears the case further. 'We make it clear that no eviction operation shall be carried out without the leave of this court,' the apex court said. The petition was filed in the high court by Uran residents Meenanath Patil and Vijay Jadhav, who contended that the developers had started construction on the plot in 2013 after obtaining a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the Chanje gram panchayat, while being well aware that they could not have built on the land without Cidco's approval. In December 2013, the petitioners filed three complaints against the allegedly illegal construction before the Chanaje gram panchayat, stating that the construction obstructed access to their homes and a water well. These were followed by complaints to the Uran panchayat samiti and Raigad district collector. In 2014, Cidco inspected the site of the allegedly illegal construction and issued a notice to the developer for the removal of the unauthorised construction under sections of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act, 1966. In January 2016, the planning authority also filed an FIR against the developers for the unauthorised construction. The petitioners' lawyer, Abhinandan Vagyani, told the court that Cidco also issued a similar notice to the developer in September 2024. 'By this time, an entire complex of five buildings had already been constructed illegally…' Vagyani said, adding that the notice was a mere formality. 'This is a classic case where the authorities have not just neglected their statutory obligations but have, by their conduct, actively permitted the perpetuation of illegal constructions…,' he told the court. Cidco's lawyer then drew the court's attention to an affidavit filed by its Controller of Unauthorized Constructions department, which stated that the planning authority had inspected the site in August 2024. 'Cidco officials found residents occupying illegally and unauthorisedly constructed buildings,' the affidavit said. A month later, the residents were issued notices under the MRTP Act, the lawyer said. The court was also informed that the regularisation application filed by the developers was rejected by Cidco on January 27 this year. The high court, however, said that Cidco had 'not only exhibited a deliberate inaction but has also taken superficial steps, further encouraging illegal constructions.' The judges said, 'By its conduct, Cidco has not only fostered unauthorised structures but has also jeopardised the interest of innocent flat purchasers who, despite investing their hard-earned money, have become victims of these illegal developments'. The court, however, added, 'These purchasers, who failed to exercise due diligence by conducting proper title searches and obtaining sanctioned plans, cannot be entirely absolved of their imprudence. Their recourse, if any, lies against the developer.' The court also ordered the authorities, including the Maharashtra government and Cidco, to take action against 'all concerned officers who have permitted the continuance of illegal construction since 2014 and take appropriate action against not only the officers of Cidco but also against the concerned developers…'. The high court also set aside an order of the civil judge, junior division, Uran, who had ordered a status quo in the case in December 2024.
