Pinnacle Court not only says ‘NO’ to two students regarding re-exam of NEET but also says ‘SORRY’ for those two students
A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai observed that while the Court sympathized with the plight of the two students, it was difficult to order a re-test for the two students.
National Eligibility cum Entrance Test, NEET 2021 for undergraduate courses, was conducted offline on September 12, 2021, and the result was declared on November 1, 2021. However, the results were on hold for almost a month due to a PIL filed by two candidates over a mistake that resulted in the mix-up of OMR sheets. On which, Bombay High Court had earlier ordered re-examination in favour of the students. And, the Supreme Court of India, today, on November 12, 2021, set aside the order by disappointing the students.
Accordingly, the bench allowed the appeal filed by the National Testing Agency against the High Court direction. Earlier, the bench had stayed the High Court direction and allowed the NTA to declare the NEET-UG results, which were withheld in view of the High Court's order.
Advocate Sudhanshu Choudhuri appearing for the two students submitted that they are repeaters and came from humble background. He read out to the court the apology tendered by the invigilator, admitting the mix up.
“..the invigilators tender apology for mistake in distributing booklets to 6 students, test booklets fell down and got mixed with wrong OMR sheets, “we were doing duty for the first time, we assure this happened in hurry and not a deliberate mistake”-they said”, the counsel submitted.
The bench noted in its order that the invigilator had admitted the mistake. The bench also found force in the submission of the counsel of the students that they lost precious time due to the mix-up. Further, the bench added that it could understand the mental stress of the young students while taking exam in such a situation.
The bench also noted that, if the order to hold re-exam for individual cases and students was passed by the court, it would set a wrong precedent for the future. Justice Rao who was hearing the case today added that if allowed, going forward students would often make it a pattern to move court seeking re-exam even for minor matters.
Justice Rao’s remarks also noted that “Every year students will come forward and seek a re-exam for one mistake or the other.” Therefore, it was important for the court not to intervene in the matter, especially considering that the results have already been declared.
The bench finally noted in the order that "...though we sympathise with their cause, we find it difficult to direct re-exam for them alone. Therefore, we set aside the direction given by the High Court".
