NEW DELHI (TIP): President Droupadi Murmu on Thursday, June 27, said paper leaks would not be condoned and perpetrators of these crimes would be meted out the strictest possible punishment.
Making a mention of recent paper leak concerns in the wake of the NEET-UG controversy and the cancellations of UGC-NET and NEET-PG exams, Murmu, in her first address to a joint sitting of Parliament after the re-election of NDA for a third time, urged politicians to rise above party politics to find solutions to the challenge of paper leaks.
“My government is committed to getting the perpetrators of paper leaks punished. We have to rise above party politics and find comprehensive solutions to this problem. Paper leaks have been seen across states off and on. The government is working on major reforms in the academic and examination sector,” Murmu said amid opposition MPs chanting ‘NEET, NEET’ slogans.
“Suno, suno (listen, listen),” the President said to protesting MPs, adding that Parliament had passed a stringent law to deal with paper leaks.
The Congress-led opposition is determined to make paper leaks a major political standoff point in the first session of the 18th Lok Sabha which ends on July 13.
The opposition MPs will raise the issue when discussions are held on the President’s address starting Friday, June 28.
(Source: TNS)
The stakes in NEET are incredibly high. Therefore, we need strong governance in the form of foolproof and complete Standard Operating Procedures and their compliance
“Coaching and admission counselling centers, typically run by business tycoons, have realized that clients, the NEET aspirants, have failed to secure preferred seats despite their advice. However, despite this fiasco, the industry has found a way to enhance their brand value through media and social media coverage. The owners of this trillion-rupee industry, along with the 23 lakh NEET aspirants this year, are up in arms. Their hypothesis is that mapping scores to ranks cannot vary very widely from previous years. In this conundrum, various allegations of cheating and paper leakage, amongst others, have been raised. Despite numerous crackdowns and investigations, paper leakage in medical admission exams remains a persistent issue.”
By Rajeev Kumar
During the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) this year, scores and ranks were inflated. As a consequence, many candidates may not get admission to their desired college as predicted based on previous years’ scores.
Coaching and admission counselling centers, typically run by business tycoons, have realized that clients, the NEET aspirants, have failed to secure preferred seats despite their advice. However, despite this fiasco, the industry has found a way to enhance their brand value through media and social media coverage. The owners of this trillion-rupee industry, along with the 23 lakh NEET aspirants this year, are up in arms. Their hypothesis is that mapping scores to ranks cannot vary very widely from previous years. In this conundrum, various allegations of cheating and paper leakage, amongst others, have been raised. Despite numerous crackdowns and investigations, paper leakage in medical admission exams remains a persistent issue.
Since its inception, NEET has emerged as the largest exam in the ‘One Exam, One Nation’ model because of the number of candidates taking the exam, the number of languages the exam is conducted in, and the diversity of various other factors. The quality of education and the college fees payable are critical factors that vary widely. A seat in a top government college with good quality education could cost a few lakhs, whereas a seat in a private college could cost a few crores. Moreover, parents are willing to go beyond their means to secure higher ranks for their children in these competitive exams, as the family’s reputation is considered to hinge on this.
Thus, the stakes in NEET are incredibly high, making it vulnerable to irregularities, accidental or intentional. Therefore, we need strong governance in the form of foolproof and complete Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and their compliance. There cannot be any weak link in the chain of operations from setting question papers to conducting the exam to admissions.
However, there are many weak links, as seen from the distribution of the wrong question paper at some centers, for example. Reportedly, some centers distributed the back-up question paper instead of the primary paper. How were both sets — the primary and the secondary/back- up question papers — accessed almost simultaneously? Were they accessed from banks’ strongrooms or another reserve? How was the back-up question paper set taken from the banks’ strongrooms without any emergency circumstances or protocols? There are several unanswered questions about the authorization and attitude of the officials concerned. This seemingly inconsequential event is actually of enormous consequence and could give us an idea of how the exam was conducted this year.
This one error led to a cascade of errors. A wrong question paper was distributed, subsequently taken back along with the Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheet, thus creating panic among the candidates. The correct question paper was then distributed, and no additional time was given for the time lost. Then, exceptionally huge grace marks were awarded for the time lost, which was later scrapped due to a public outcry.
Each of the above demonstrates the need for critical SOPs for complete governance of the exam, which includes several stakeholders such as those who set the question paper, translators, reviewers, the printing press, officials at examination centers, banks’ strongrooms, and invigilators. Any loose links in this chain have the potential for malpractices. Only proper investigation may reveal any substantial wrongdoing.
Despite all the above pitfalls, it is commendable that the National Testing Agency (NTA) voluntarily disclosed most of the information, as per Section 4 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. Since the declaration of NEET 2024, the NTA has disclosed the most relevant information through its press releases. In addition, the NTA has followed SOPs for disclosure of answer keys, collecting feedback about wrong questions and answer keys, disclosure of the individual OMR sheet, and self-evaluation of one’s score, which seem to have worked with no issues at all.
It is on record that these SOPs were developed and directed through a decade-long (2006-2015) protracted legal battle by the author of this article in the Supreme Court and High Courts to ensure transparency and develop well-defined rational SoPs for admissions to the prestigious Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs). In one such judgment, the Supreme Court observed in 2011, “In fact the action taken by the appellants in challenging the procedure for JEE 2006, their attempts to bring in transparency in the procedure by various RTI applications, and the debate generated by the several views of experts during the course of the writ proceedings, have helped in making the merit ranking process more transparent and accurate.”
However, this alone is not enough for NEET. The NTA should devise SOPs to get stabilized cut-offs, as done by the IITs, avoid inflated scores and ranks, and achieve a long-tail distribution. It should work to replace ad-hocism with well-defined, sound, and secure SOPs. It should follow a professional war-room culture to facilitate quick and sound decision-making during the entire process. As the Supreme Court said in 2011, “The selection process requires to be upgraded and fine-tuned year after year with periodic changes…, so that the selection process and examination remain relevant and meaningful.”
(Rajeev Kumar is a former Computer Science professor at IIT Kharagpur, IIT Kanpur, BITS Pilani, and JNU)
The controversy over allegations of paper leak and malpractices in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) needs quick resolution. The Supreme Court may have refused to stay the counselling for admissions to medical colleges, but confusion and anxiety persist. The Bench’s observation that the sanctity of the entrance test has been affected puts the onus on the National Testing Agency (NTA) to come clean. It must answer the litany of questions regarding the alleged irregularities. Over 22 lakh candidates took the test, which is considered a gateway to a career in medicine. Conducting an exercise of such magnitude demands extreme caution and responsibility. The slightest laxity or an error of judgement can affect the fortunes of thousands of candidates. The NTA has to clear doubts, allay fears and restore trust.
The fairness of the process is the cornerstone of any examination. In the region, a recurring theme is the uncertainty regarding the impartiality of recruitment tests. Haryana, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh have been rocked by cheating scams. In Uttar Pradesh, the police constable recruitment exam had to be cancelled just days after it was conducted in February after confirmation of a paper leak. Stringent legislation has been introduced in some states to deal with paper leaks and recruitment scams, but a strategy of deterrence can only work through firm follow-up action. Having clean, competent officers at the helm is a basic necessity.
The apex court is yet to take a final decision on the NEET-UG issue, but voices of protest are expected to get shriller. As a four-member committee formed by the NTA looks at the options to defuse the crisis, also expected would be a set of recommendations to ensure there’s no repeat of the fiasco.
New Delhi (TIP)- The Supreme Court on Thursday, Jan 20, said that reservation for backward classes is not at odds with merit but furthers its distributive impact while upholding the 27 per cent quota for Other Backward Classes (OBC) in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) undergraduate and postgraduate medical admissions (all-India quota). On January 7, a bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and A S Bopanna in a brief order upheld the constitutional validity of the OBC reservation and approved for the current admission cycle, the Rs 8 lakh annual income limit set for identifying those eligible for the quota for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). The court had then said that it would soon come out with a detailed order giving reasons for its decision.
In the detailed order pronounced Thursday, the bench said that competitive exams do not reflect the economic social advantage accrued to some classes over a period of time and that merit should be socially contextualised.
“Articles 15(4) and 15(5) are facets of substantive equality. Competitive exams do not reflect (the) economic social advantage which is accrued to some classes. Merit should be socially contextualised. Reservation is not at odds with merit but furthers its distributive impact,” the court said.
Upholding the Centre’s decision to allow the quota, the court said that the government was not required to seek its permission before granting reservation in the all-India quota seats and its decision was therefore correct.
Pointing out that any intervention by the court would have further delayed the admission process for the current year, the bench said that judicial propriety would not permit it to stay the quota when the counselling is pending, especially when constitutional interpretation is involved. The court underlined the dire need to have more doctors working in hospitals given the Covid-19 pandemic situation and said that any change in the eligibility qualification would have delayed the admission process and led to cross litigation.
The court will hear the question of the EWS reservation in detail in the third week of March.
Petitioners in the matter had challenged the July 29, 2021 notification of the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) providing 27 per cent reservation for OBCs and 10 per cent quota to the EWS category in the NEET UG and PG (all-India quota) admissions. Hearing the petitions, the Supreme Court had asked the Centre to explain what exercise it had undertaken to arrive at Rs 8 lakh criteria. Responding to this, the Centre told the court on November 25, 2021, that it would revisit the criteria and sought four weeks to complete the exercise. Subsequently, the Centre appointed a three-member committee comprising former finance secretary Ajay Bhushan Pandey, member secretary ICSSR V K Malhotra and principal economic advisor to the Indian government Sanjeev Sanyal.
The committee submitted its report on December 31 recommending that the Rs 8 lakh limit which has continued since 2019 be retained, but suggested some changes to how to apply the same.
It also favoured continuing with the existing system as the admission process was already on and that if disturbed at the end or fag-end of the process, it would create more complications than expected both for the beneficiaries as well as for the authorities.
The petitioners opposed the recommendation saying the report was an admission that the government had not conducted any study before fixing the Rs 8 lakh limit for the EWS in 2019.
Signup to our Newsletter!
Don’t miss out on all the happenings around the world
