ABSTRACT
the recent June 4th event, when the NTA announced the NEET UG results concurrently with the announcement of the Lok Sabha Elections 2024 results. This was perceived as a calculated action by the NTA to quell student complaints during the election-related fervour. The students have openly said that NTA has deceived them by disclosing the results ten days ahead of the scheduled June 14th release date. Suspicions of a paper leak have been raised due to unexpectedly high inflation rates caused by 67 pupils receiving the highest score of 720 out of 720. There was one well-known coaching centre that produced seven outstanding players. Due to the paucity of time allotted in a certain centre, 1563 students received grace marks for the first time in the history of Neet UG. The goal of this research paper is to provide a detailed study of the entire topic, in which NTA has been the target of several claims and students have nowhere to turn to file complaints. This is regarded as a flagrant infringement of pupils’ right to privacy. NTA has not been able to operate openly and responsibly. This paper will also address the many committees and agencies engaged in this disagreement, as well as the points made by the students.
KEYWORDS
- fundamental Rights
- Mature Minors
- Information Access
- NEET-UG
- National Testing Agency (NTA)
- Right to Information
- Article 19(1)(a); Article 21; Article 32,’ Article 226
- Grievance Redressal
- Exam Transparency
- Legal Recourse
- Compensatory Marks
- Paper Leak Controversy
INTRODUCTION
National Testing Agency (NTA) has been established as a premier, specialist, autonomous and self-sustained testing organization to conduct entrance examinations for admission/fellowship in higher educational institutions. Assessing the competence of candidates for admissions and recruitment has always been a challenge in terms of matching with research-based international standards, efficiency, transparency and error-free delivery. The National Testing Agency is entrusted to address all such issues using best in every field, from test preparation, to test delivery and to test marking.
Its mission is to improve equity and quality in education by administering research-based valid, reliable, efficient, transparent, fair and international-level assessments. The best subject matter experts, psychometricians and IT delivery and security professionals will ensure that the current gaps in existing assessment systems are properly identified and bridged. Its core value is to create a system which will promote teaching (by teachers), learning (by students) and assessment (by parents and institutions). NTA strongly believes in the quality, efficiency, effectiveness, equity and security of assessments. To practice these values, NTA will constantly engage with its stakeholders, viz. students, parents, teachers, experts and partner institutions.
The recent controversies surrounding the declaration of the NEET UG results by the National Testing Agency (NTA) have raised significant concerns regarding the accountability and legitimacy of the agency. Affected students are struggling to find avenues to voice their grievances and challenge the perceived mismanagement. Coupled with the escalating costs of examinations, candidates are becoming passive sufferers of the system.
A critical issue is the NTA’s handling of Right to Information (RTI) requests. According to the RTI Act, public authorities are required to facilitate access to information. However, the NTA does not provide a specific form for seeking information under this act. Instead, individuals must submit a written request along with the applicable fee, specifying the information they require. This lack of a structured format can be seen as a violation of candidates’ right to information, which is part of their fundamental rights under Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution.
Article 19(1) guarantees every citizen the freedom of speech and expression. This fundamental right includes the ability to seek, receive, and impart information. By not providing a streamlined process for RTI requests, the NTA may be infringing on these constitutional rights, thereby limiting the transparency and accountability expected from a public examination body.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This paper is analytical and doctrinal in nature and the research is based on secondary sources for the deep analysis of the event reporting, the objections from students and the right to information of students. Secondary sources of information like newspapers, journals, and websites are used for the research.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
(The Journal of Constitutional Law published by the University of Pennsylvania under the heading AN EMERGING RIGHT FOR MATURE MINORS TO RECEIVE INFORMATION)
This journal discusses how Each adult is entitled to exercise the full panoply of constitutional rights, regardless of his or her ability to understand or rationally exercise those rights. the premise talks about how Children also possess constitutional liberties, but each liberty asserted by a minor may ripen at different times and in different contexts. To exercise the range of rights that ripen as minors mature, young people need access to ideas, protected under the First Amendment, that will inform their increasing autonomy and understanding. The argument that teenagers have a right to knowledge despite their parents’ objections draws from three strands of existing jurisprudence.
- First, it relies on the line of First Amendment theory that the right to speech includes an integral right to receive information so that speakers can evaluate and choose among the ideas which they prefer to voice.
- Second, it builds on the doctrine that children possess constitutional rights, including rights under the First Amendment.
- Third, the argument draws on precedents that recognize that mature minors possess certain liberty interests independent of their parents.
A minor adult has the right of scrutiny upon its fundamental rights and is entitled to seek information out of a transparent state. This is seen as a building block to create an aware and responsible future citizen for the nation.
In order to hold the National Testing Agency (NTA) responsible for its seeming disdain for candidates who are upset, the piece emphasizes how crucial it is for students to use their rights. Serious questions have been raised by the NTA’s decision to abruptly and without warning move the NEET-UG result disclosure date to coincide with the day of the Lok Sabha election announcement. This sudden change has raised issues about the validity of NTA’s operations, particularly because the organization is not subject to IT Act regulation and does not have established channels for candidates to directly report concerns. As a result of this circumstance, prospective physicians are now doubting the NTA’s responsibility and openness, underscoring the necessity for a more organized and trustworthy procedure for handling student complaints.
(TIMES OF INDIA news article, Manash Pratim Gohain, Jun 6, 2024)
The article talks about how amid concerns raised by National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2024 candidates regarding compensatory marks due to loss of time for some aspirants, a high number of toppers, and a higher qualifying cut-off this year, the NTA clarified on Thursday that compensatory marks were awarded based on “few write petitions” and the recommendation of a Grievance Redressal Committee. The agency also noted that of the 67 toppers, 50 scored 720 marks due to the revision of one physics answer key and 6 received compensatory marks for the loss of time. Candidates took to social media to share their scorecards and question the NTA, questioning how one can score 718 and 719 marks out of 720 under the current marking scheme. Also, NTA had initially posted the toppers list with marks and later reposted it without marks. NTA explained that the concerns raised by the candidates through writ petitions and representations required careful consideration. Consequently, a grievance redressal committee, composed of eminent experts in examination and academia, was formed to review these grievances and provide recommendations.
DEFENCES GIVEN BY NTA
NTA stated, ” The committee considered the grievances/ representations based on factual reports from functionaries and CCTV footage from the concerned exam centres. The loss of examination times was assessed and candidates were compensated with marks based on their answering efficiency and the time lost, as per the mechanism/formula established by the hon’ble Apex Court. The revised marks for these candidates range from 20 to 720. Among these, two candidates scored 718 and 719 marks respectively, due to the compensatory marks. Analysis of the CCTV footage confirmed that the integrity of the examination was not compromised at these centres.”
Regarding the high cutoffs, NTA provided an example of the average marks of qualified candidates (out of 720) over 5 years, indicating that they vary annually. “The cutoff scores annually are determined based on the overall performance of the candidates each year. The increase in the cutoffs annually reflects the examinations and the higher performance standards achieved by the candidates this year.”
Addressing concerns about the significant increase in the high scores and toppers, some of whom claimed that a cluster of toppers came from a particular centre, NTA noted that the increase in candidates led to a larger pool of high scorers. “The number of candidates who appeared in 2023 was 20,38,596 while the number of candidates who appeared in 2024 increased to 23,33,297,” it stated.
NTA further clarified that it received 13,373 challenges to the provisional answer key for one physics question. “Due to differences in the old and new editions of the NCERT textbook, the subject experts held that two options be considered correct instead of one for this question. Of the 67 candidates who scored 720/720 did so due to the revision of the physics answer key, and 6 did so due to compensatory marks for the loss of time. It is pertinent to mention that the toppers are from across the country”
AVAILABLE REMEDIES FOR STUDENTS
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, of 2005 is a central legislation in India that provides a legal framework for citizens to access information held by public authorities. However, its constitutional foundation lies in the broader principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution. It includes the following articles in the Indian constitution:
1. Article 19(1)(a) – Freedom of Speech and Expression
2. Article 21 – Protection of Life and Personal Liberty
3. Article 32 – Remedies for Enforcement of Rights
4. Article 226 – Power of High Courts to Issue Certain Writs
he RTI For students and candidates affected by this situation, the following steps can be considered to address their grievances:
- Submitting RTI Requests: Students can still make RTI requests by making a formal application, even in the absence of a defined form. They should make sure the request is precise and unambiguous, outlining the necessary data and containing the relevant charge.
- Approaching Higher Authorities: Students may take their issues to higher authorities, such as the Central Information Commission (CIC), which is in charge of enforcing the RTI Act, if they are not satisfied with the NTA’s response.
- Legal Recourse: Students who believe that their basic rights have been violated under Article 19(1) may think about obtaining legal counsel in order to investigate the possibilities of submitting a writ petition in the High Court or Supreme Court.
- Public Advocacy: By interacting with media outlets, student unions, and educational advocacy groups, they may raise awareness of their concerns and possibly put pressure on the NTA and other pertinent authorities to take action.
- Petitions and Campaigns: Launching or endorsing initiatives calling for increased accountability and transparency from the NTA has the potential to garner wider support and lead to legislative changes.
By adopting these actions, students may actively contest the status quo and speak out for their rights, hoping to improve the examination process’s accountability and openness.
RECENT UPDATES ON THE CONTROVERSIES
The RTI’s credibility has been bolstered by several rulings rendered by the Indian Supreme Court. For example, the court stressed the value of openness and the right to know as essential components of democracy in instances like the State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975) and S.P. Gupta v. President of India (1982).
(Case: Shivangi Mishra and others v. National Testing Agency and others | DIARY NO. – 25656/2024) The Supreme Court on Tuesday (June 11) issued notice to the Centre and the National Testing Agency on a petition seeking the cancellation of the National Entrance-cum-Eligibility Test (NEET) exam held this year for the Under-Graduate(UG) Medical courses over an alleged paper leak. A vacation bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah posted the matter on July 8 seeking a response from the National Testing Agency (NTA).
The counsel for the NTA submitted that the petition be tagged along with an earlier petition on which notice was issued by a bench led by the Chief Justice of India on May 17. That petition is listed on July 8, he informed. The bench then posted the present petition along with the earlier one listed on July 8.
Advocate Mathews J Nedumpara, appearing for the petitioners, sought a counselling stay. However, the bench refused to do so. Shivangi Mishra and nine others filed the petition on June 1 before the declaration of the results (Shivangi Mishra and others vs. National Testing Agency and others Diary No.25656/2024). After the declaration of the results, few more petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court questioning the decision of the National Testing Agency to award grace marks to several candidates. However, those petitions, which were filed after the declaration of results, were not listed today.
The writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution seeks to direct the National Testing Agency to conduct the exam again given the allegations of the paper leak. Raising doubts about the sanctity of the exam held on May 5, the petitioners seek the cancellation of the exam. On May 17, while considering another petition seeking similar reliefs, the Supreme Court refused to stay the declaration of the results of the NEET-UG exam. Though the bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud issued notice on that petition and posted the matter in July, the bench stated that the results of the exams held on a pan-India basis cannot be stayed.
Many prominent coaching centres have together filed a joint petition to seek re-examination of all candidates. They contended that the NTA was unfair in the marking scheme and the result announcement was not transparent. There were also cases reported where marks of candidates were altered after a day of announcement. The coaching centres have urged students to start preparing for the re-exam as there are high chances that court might give orders to reconduct the examination.
The National Testing Agency (NTA) has denied any reports of paper leaks, calling them completely false and baseless. “To clarify these rumours, we confirm that every single question paper has been accounted for,” stated NTA Director Sadhana Parashar. The NTA has issued no official statement regarding the re-conduct of NEET UG 2024.
SUGGESTIONS
Students have a right to information because it empowers them to make informed decisions about their education, employment, and future. The basis for this right is laid out in Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, which deals with freedom of speech and expression and has been interpreted to include the right to seek information. Article 21, which protects the right to life and personal freedom, lends more credence to the notion that being able to get knowledge is essential to living a moral life and making informed judgments. Fast and accurate information availability promotes enhanced transparency and accountability in educational institutions, enabling equitable access to resources, fair admissions procedures, and accurate assessments of academic performance.
The situation with the NEET-UG results and the subsequent controversies has created a complex and challenging environment for students. There are some potential solutions. The NTA shall provide a full and clear explanation of the whole evaluation process, including the methodology for giving compensating marks and the reasoning behind any modifications to the answer keys. This will assist in fostering trust among students and stakeholders. An impartial committee should be created to evaluate the NTA’s complaints and decision-making process. This group should include members from student organizations, legal experts, and educational authorities.
The NTA should make its grievance redressal procedure more accessible and effective. This involves establishing a dedicated helpline, an online site for grievance filing, and assuring prompt response to complaints. The NTA should offer frequent information on the progress of grievances and the steps being taken. This promotes openness and keeps students informed. Involving student representatives in decision-making processes, particularly those impacting examination policies, can assist to address concerns and incorporate student viewpoints. Offering legal and psychological counselling to impacted students can help them cope with the stress and uncertainty. This might be assisted by the NTA working with educational institutions.
The NTA and other educational entities should endeavour to implement policy changes that promote fairness and openness in the test process. This involves changing the marking systems, assessment procedures, and result declaration protocols. Implementing modern technology for real-time monitoring of test facilities and automated grievance resolution can assist in reducing mistakes and malpractices. Blockchain technology, for example, might be used to protect and validate test results. Encouraging public conversation and activism on student rights and examination board obligations can result in long-term reforms. This might entail working with the media, non-governmental organizations, and educational advocacy groups. Advocating for legislative reforms that would need tougher rules and accountability mechanisms for organizations such as the NTA. This includes revisions to existing or the establishment of legislation that safeguards student rights.
CONCLUSION
Right to Information Act, 2005 is an Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. RTI has been given the status of a fundamental right under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. Article 19 (1) under which every citizen has freedom of speech and expression and has the right to know how the government works, what role does it play, what are its functions etc.
The National Testing Agency (NTA) has violated candidates’ rights to an unbiased, transparent, and accountable testing process in a number of grave ways. The abrupt modification of the NEET-UG result reveal date, which fell on the same day as the Lok Sabha election announcement, damaged transparency and created suspicion. In addition, there have been allegations of unfairness resulting from the poor communication on the allotment of bonus points for delayed completion. Because the settlement procedure was unclear and there were no clear channels for voicing complaints, many candidates felt disregarded and neglected. Even though the physics answer key alteration resulted in some candidates receiving full points, it was not addressed correctly, raising concerns about the evaluation procedure’s uniformity and reliability. The validity of the test was further called into question by groups of high results at specific sites.
Moreover, the discrepancy in the distribution of compensatory marks suggests potential bias, which may cause certain applicants to perceive unfair discrimination. These practices infringe upon candidates’ rights to due process, fair treatment, and access to information as guaranteed by the constitution. Significant changes are required in light of the ensuing psychological and emotional strain on candidates and worries about the validity of upcoming tests.
To address these issues, the NTA must undertake policy reforms that promote openness and fairness. Some of these efforts include modernizing marking systems, increasing real-time monitoring, developing precise grievance processes, and employing secure technology such as blockchain to ensure verifiable results. Rebuilding public trust in the examination process and safeguarding candidates’ rights can be done by pushing legislative measures that require more strict standards and accountability.
Basic worries about transparency, accountability, and student rights are brought to light by the controversy surrounding the National Testing Agency (NTA) and the NEET-UG 2024 test. Legal action and demands for re-examination result from applicants’ persistent discontent, despite the NTA’s attempts to address issues with compensating marks and important modifications. The seriousness of the matter is underscored by the most recent notification the Supreme Court sent to the NTA and the Centre over purported document leaks. This problem highlights how maintaining fairness and integrity in the examination process requires a robust grievance redressal procedure, transparent communication, and respect to constitutional rights. Students are urged to actively investigate other options in order to protect their rights and enhance the testing process, including RTI requests, lawsuits, public lobbying, and petitions. The ongoing legal proceedings will likely shape the future conduct and governance of such critical national examinations.
name- Suhani Khandelwal
college- institute of law, Nirma university, Ahmedabad.