During the last hearing concerning the irregularities in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test – Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2024 on July 8, the Supreme Court had directed the union government and the National Testing Agency (NTA) to assess the extent of the damages caused by the exam paper leak/breach. Additionally, the court instructed the NTA to identify if the beneficiaries of the breach could be distinguished from the honest candidates. Just two days later, on July 10, the NTA and the Ministry of Education (MoE) filed affidavits in the Supreme Court, which included an analysis report signed by IIT Madras.

The union government’s decision to assign the analysis task to IIT Madras has sparked allegations of quid pro quo. Critics suspect that the institute might be repaying a favour to the government following the mishap during the JEE (Advanced) in 2017. This choice also raises questions about potential anomalies and conflict of interest, as IIT Madras, being the organizing institute for JEE (Advanced) 2024, was a member of the governing body of NTA. Such concerns cast doubt on the objectivity and impartiality of the reports produced by IIT Madras for the government and NTA.

It must be noted that in the report by IIT Madras, submitted along with the affidavit by MoE clearly mentions that the analysis was not conducted by an IIT Madras team by themselves, rather, the analysis was performed by the NTA team which was only verified by the IIT Madras team. This is significant because this allows for NTA to cherry pick parameters and representations of the data in order to downplay the possibilities of widespread malpractices which would tarnish its reputation.

Moreover, in the IIT Madras report, it is mentioned that Python was used for data processing, PostgreSQL for data storage, and Metabase for analysis. However, the report fails to explain the methodology or the logic behind the selection of each parameter used in their analysis. There is no detailed explanation of the criteria or the reasoning for choosing specific parameters to represent in the report, nor how these parameters would effectively indicate whether there is widespread or localized malpractice. This lack of transparency in their methodology raises doubts about the validity of their conclusions regarding the integrity of the exam process.

Affidavit by Ministry of Education

The report states that the marks distribution follows a bell-shaped curve, indicating no abnormality. The NTA reasons that, given there are only 1.1 lakh seats, they analysed the data of the top 1.4 lakh students. However, half of these seats are in private colleges where any qualified candidate (more than 12 lakh in total) can secure admission with sufficient funds. Therefore, individuals aiming merely to qualify for NEET might also engage in malpractice, and they could fall anywhere within the rank ranges up to around 12 lakhs. The assumption that malpractices occurred exclusively within the top 5% or that everyone who engaged in malpractice ended up in the top 5% is unfounded. In fact, data (Annexure A1, page 21-23 of NTA affidavit) from Bihar reveals that candidates who obtained the question paper before the exam scored different marks, many of which are not within the top 1.4 lakh range. Consequently, it is not possible to determine if malpractice occurred by merely examining the curve. If the candidates who engaged in malpractices scored varying marks, and rise in marks due to malpractice is evenly distributed across different ranges, that would still produce a bell curve. Hence, the current analysis fails to account for the potential widespread nature of malpractice.

The NTA claims that the lack of a localized increase in toppers at specific exam centres is evidence against widespread malpractice in the exam. However, this argument is flawed. If malpractice is widespread and affects most exam centres, localized analysis will fail to detect anomalies because the issue is systemic. The NTA is not attempting to investigate potential systemic malpractice that could impact the entire exam. Instead, they are using the absence of localized malpractice using absence of localized inflation to argue against widespread malpractice. This approach ignores the possibility that mark inflation and other irregularities could be occurring uniformly across all centres, indicating a systemic rather than localized issue.

Tables 6 and 7 in the report present centre-wise rank lists, highlighting the centres with the maximum toppers. Table 6 shows data for 2024, while Table 7 shows data for 2023. They compare data of different centres from two different years and focus on the fact that in both cases, only two students from each centre made it to the top 100 ranks. They use this as an argument to deny localized malpractice, claiming that “if there was localized malpractice, then this number would have been much larger.” This is a baseless assertion because localized malpractice could also result in an increase in the number of people who qualified or achieved higher ranks than they would have without malpractice, and not necessarily only in the top ranks. The assumption that anyone engaging in malpractice would end up in the top rank list is flawed.

Here, the report emphasizes that this year there are only two students from each centre in the top 100, just as there were last year, indicating no localized malpractice. It is to be observed that here, where there is no increase in the number of toppers, they present it is evidence for lack of localized malpractice. However, in the case of an increase in the number of toppers, instead of investigating the possibility of a malpractice, they simply downplay the significance of the increase and move on. For example, in Table 1, the number candidates from Bengaluru to reach top 100 ranks increased from 1 in 2023 to 5 in 2024, which is a staggering 400% increase in Bengaluru alone. However, the NTA merely commented that this was the maximum increase seen in this category downplaying its significance and moved on to claim that this data does not indicate abnormality instead of investigating this significant increase in the number of toppers there. This raises doubts on the consistency of metrics used by the NTA to indicate malpractices.

It is unclear what magnitude of increase or decrease in the number of toppers in which category is deemed normal and how NTA and IIT Madras arrived at these standards. Importantly, when implying that the increase from 2023 to 2024 is not abnormal, it is essential to compare this with the increase from 2022 to 2023 and the previous years. However, IIT Madras did not consider the data of toppers from NEET 2022 in these tables. Without this comparison, the qualitative claim of the increase being normal enough to dismiss the possibility of malpractice is unsubstantiated.

Plotting the data in table 16, which is the only table in which data from 2022 is included, it is clearly seen that there is a huge abnormal mark inflation in 2024. In the report, NTA maintains that the increase in the number of toppers in individual centres and cities is not inexplicably abnormal. This logically suggests that more centres contributed to toppers in 2024 compared to 2023. There should also be a significant increase in the number of centres producing toppers in 2024 that never had toppers in previous years. As mentioned above, NTA had dismissed localized malpractice citing the lack of increase in toppers across years. If we follow the NTA’s logic that an increasing number of students from certain centres can indicate alleged malpractice, then the NTA should actually scrutinize data on centres or cities that never had toppers in previous years but suddenly have toppers in 2024. According to their own logic, this would be a better metric to identify potential centres where malpractice could have occurred. However, they do not provide this data. Instead, they are cherry-picking data that suggests consistency between this year and previous years, thereby claiming that there is no malpractice.

Moreover, NTA simply attributes this increase in the marks obtained by students to 25% reduction in syllabus.  However, this analysis cannot determine whether the inflation is due to the syllabus reduction, a decrease in exam difficulty, or malpractice. The NTA’s justification that a 25% syllabus reduction caused this significant mark inflation is unfounded and appears to be a misleading explanation, which IIT Madras has unfortunately endorsed.

There are two primary issues: mark inflation and malpractices. While this document is ostensibly commissioned to investigate malpractices, it tacitly downplays the mark inflation that has occurred, dismissing it as normal and simply attributing it to the increase in the number of candidates and the reduction in the syllabus.

Affidavit by NTA

The following graph indicates a significant increase in the number of students scoring higher marks in 2024 compared to 2023. This is evident from the higher tail extending towards higher scores.

NTA has only considered the data for the years 2023 and 2024 and claims that the increase in the number of toppers from 2023 to 2024 is “not significantly higher in number” than previous years. When claiming that the increase in number of toppers from 2023 to 2024 is not significant, it is essential to contextualise this claim historically with data of number of toppers from previous years, which the NTA has conveniently not done.

NTA explains that out of the 67 candidates who initially scored full marks, 6 of them got that score because of grace marks, which was later redacted and a retest was held for those candidates. As none of them scored 720 in the retest, the number of toppers is now 61. Further, it states that, out of the 61, 44 candidates went from scoring 715 to 720, on account of the revision of answer key, and hence the “actual” candidates with full marks are only 17.

Forty-four candidates ended up getting full marks after selecting an answer which is accepted as correct according to the NTA, causing a revision in the answer key. However, NTA, weaponising its own fault of providing two correct options to a question, is trying to create a false difference between “actual” toppers and other toppers, to downplay the mark inflation this year as evident with 61 toppers with full marks.

Moreover, the report attributes the increase in number of high scorers to 25% reduction in syllabus. This argument of NTA must be justified by demonstrating that students across different percentiles—those at the bottom, middle, and top sections of the performance curve—are scoring higher. If the exam is indeed easier due to the reduced syllabus, this ease should be reflected uniformly across all performance levels, resulting in a noticeable shift of the entire distribution towards higher scores. However, an examination of the data curve reveals that this is not the case. The lower end of the distribution shows little to no change in candidate performance, while there is a significant increase in marks among the top performers. Particularly, the number of students achieving very high scores has risen markedly compared to previous years.

Further, to claim that the exam was easier due to the reduction of the syllabus, the NTA in their affidavit (page 19) states that because the syllabus was reduced and the time remained the same, the question paper was much more “balanced”. However, despite the reduction in the syllabus, the number of questions students had to answer remained unchanged, and the time allotted was the same as in previous years. Hence, the NTA’s framing in the affidavit which suggests that the exam became easier due to more time, is misleading.

The NTA claims that “difficult and time-consuming chapters like P Block in chemistry and conceptual chapters in biology were deleted.” This statement reflects a strategic wordplay. They characterize chapters like p-Block, from which questions are often memory-based making them easier to attempt, as “difficult and time-consuming,” while characterizing unspecified chapters in biology as “conceptual,” implying that they were difficult as well. This renders the narrative that the exam was much easier due to syllabus reduction. Notably, the affidavit does not mention the physics syllabus reduction, wherein many of the subtopics that were removed still continues to be relevant for a comprehensive conceptual understanding of the chapters they were a part of. For instance, the fundamental concepts of average speed and average velocity are the subtopics “cut down” in the Class 11 Physics chapter introducing Kinematics. Moreover, many of the subtopics removed historically did not carry as much weightage in NEET. These considerations challenge the claim that the syllabus reduction made the exam significantly easier.

The NTA states that the syllabus reduction made the paper “balanced, ensuring accessibility for students from diverse backgrounds,” implying that the easier question paper enabled better performance from these students. This assertion raises significant concerns about the nature, intent, and attitude of NEET towards marginalized students in general. By claiming that reducing the syllabus and burden has helped marginalized students, the NTA implicitly admits that NEET has been unduly burdensome for these students in previous years.

Additionally, the NTA claims that the 2024 NEET-UG question paper was made easier to provide students from various geographical and socio-economic backgrounds an equal opportunity to succeed. They argue that this move was intended to discourage the growing dependency on coaching institutions. The NTA must substantiate its claim by providing information on the steps consciously taken to reduce the burden on marginalized students, and how this was reflected in the question paper. Further, it is important to analyse the data showing the proportion of students from marginalized backgrounds who secured admission into government colleges (ranks above 50,000) in 2024 compared to the previous years to assess the impact of these steps.

However, this claim is contradicted by NTA’s data showing that most of the top 60,000 rankers, who qualify for government medical seats, come from cities with extensive coaching facilities. In the report, IIT Madras argues that cities like Sikar, Kota, and Kottayam lead in the number of toppers within the top 1000 ranks due to “these places having many coaching classes”. The report inadvertently acts as an advertisement for coaching centres. Strikingly, when the NTA presents that the top cities producing the highest number of NEET rankers are those with many coaching classes, the NTA is essentially admitting that the ability to access and afford coaching classes is crucial for cracking NEET and achieving top ranks. This highlights a systemic bias within the NEET system that favours wealthier candidates and undermines the claim of improved accessibility for marginalized students.

The data analysis conducted by the NTA only examined whether students in these centres secured enough marks for “admission to medical colleges of primary importance,” which in our understanding refers to government colleges. This raises a doubt as to why NTA does not seem to deem worthy of consideration the possibility of students seeking to gain admission to private colleges engaging in malpractices. NEET initially promised to curb the exorbitant fees of private medical colleges, a promise yet to be fulfilled. The 50^th percentile cut-off to clear NEET ensures that individuals who can afford such high fees can surpass those with higher marks and still become doctors. While NEET was supposed to champion merit, it has failed to address the commercialization of medical education, which benefits the wealthy over those with higher scores. Now, even in their analysis of NEET malpractice, the NTA’s approach seems to exclude the wealthy from their scrutiny.

Instances of malpractices 

The case of malpractice in Godhra (page 34-36) highlights significant vulnerabilities in the NEET examination process. In Godhra, the deputy superintendent of examination conspired with students to manipulate OMR sheets. The deputy superintendent in this case was a school teacher at the examination centre who was responsible for sealing and returning the OMR sheets to the NTA and had the opportunity to fill in correct answers on blank OMR sheets left by the candidates (page 82-83). His involvement underscores how internal personnel can subvert security protocols despite the NTA’s measures to prevent malpractices.

The only reason the incident in Godhra came to light is because district officials discovered the plan and acted in advance to foil it. The Godhra case reveals a significant gap in the NTA’s oversight and security measures, suggesting that undetected malpractices could be happening elsewhere across the country without the knowledge of local authorities. This uncertainty further undermines the credibility of the NTA’s claims regarding the sanctity and integrity of the examination process.

The Godhra incident reveals systemic issues within the NTA’s protocols demonstrating that the perpetrators can be among the entrusted personnel. If malpractices occur at such systemic scales, then the current analysis by the NTA and IIT Madras, which is based on the assumption that malpractice can only occur through individual students cheating, will not be able to detect them. The analysis does not consider the issue of internal corruption within the system itself. There is an imperative need for mechanisms to be in place to protect the integrity of the exam from internal manipulation at administrative levels.

Moreover, the NTA’s affidavit mentions a paper leak in Patna, where individuals obtained the question paper before the exam. However, in the affidavit, it has not been explained how the question paper was leaked despite stringent security protocols, raising doubts about the effectiveness of NTA’s security measures. In the Patna case, it is crucial to note that the NTA still does not know how the question paper was leaked, as the matter is still under CBI investigation. Without understanding how this particular leak happened and determining whether similar leaks occurred elsewhere, the NTA cannot confidently claim that issues at these centres does not have “wide spread ramifications of impactable magnitude.” Without identifying and addressing the root cause of the leak, it is impossible to evaluate whether the exam process has suffered systemic failure or not.

In the last hearing, the Honourable Chief Justice of India asked whether the timing of the leaked question paper in Patna allowed enough time for it to spread across the country or if it was limited to a case of localized malpractice. In response, the NTA’s affidavit failed to address this crucial question. Evidence showed that candidates were tutored with the leaked question paper and provided with solutions, indicating that there was sufficient time to generate the answers, teach the students, and prepare them for the exam. However, the affidavit does not mention any of these instances or details. It also omits how the question paper was transferred to those generating the solutions, whether through electronic means or otherwise. This lack of information leaves significant gaps in understanding the extent and mechanics of the malpractice, further questioning the integrity of the examination process.

The way ahead

On page 74 of the affidavit, the NTA shames candidates who went to court for a re-examination, arguing that their scores are too low and insinuating that their motivation for calling for a reexam is to get another attempt. This begs the question who are the ‘right’ petitioners in the eyes of the NTA? Candidates who already scored high marks are unlikely to want the current exam scrapped, as they stand to gain from their existing scores. Only those who did not score highly would ask for a re-exam, as they are the ones most affected by any widespread malpractice. The NTA’s stance effectively silences any opposition or calls for a re-exam by dismissing petitioners based on their performance. This is a contrived way for the NTA to avoid accountability. The call for a re-NEET is about the NTA’s performance in terms of transparency and fairness as an examination conducting authority, and not about the petitioners’ performance. It is essential to focus on the integrity of the examination process rather than discrediting those who raise legitimate concerns.

Finally, students have been put through a lot already due to the stress caused by NEET this year and its failings. We request the NTA to not further exacerbate the misery of the students and their families by selectively choosing and presenting data and silencing student concerns. We demand that the NTA be transparent and make its data public for social audit so that we as a society can assist students in finding the truth and some long overdue relief.

The post If malpractice is widespread, across most exam centres, localised analysis will fail to detect anomalies: NTA’s flawed defence appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“Even if there is 0.001% negligence on the part of anyone, it should be thoroughly dealt with. All these matters ought not to be treated as adversarial litigation,” the Bench said, as per Livelaw.

The present petition has been tagged with other similar petitions that had been filed in the Supreme Court, where allegations of malpractice and paper leaks had been made.  It is essential to note that.

Background of the controversy

On June 4, 2024, the NTA released the NEET 2024 results, catching students and parents off guard due to the results being announced ten days ahead of the anticipated date. This early release coincided with the national focus on the general election results, which added to the public’s astonishment. The declaration that 67 candidates had secured a perfect score of 720/720 raised immediate concerns, as achieving such scores is exceptionally difficult given NEET’s negative marking system.

Further suspicions were fuelled by reports that many of the top scorers had consecutive roll numbers, implying they might have taken the exam at the same centre. This raised allegations of collusion and possible exam centre malpractice. The situation was further complicated by reports of candidates scoring 718/720 and 719/720—scores that are impossible under NEET’s marking scheme, sparking confusion and suspicion among stakeholders.

Legal headway made till now 

On the last day of hearing, June 13, the said matter had been brought before the Vacation Bench of the Supreme Court of India.

The Court had reviewed the pleas demanding the cancellation of NEET-UG 2024 results and objections to the awarding of grace marks. One petition was filed by Physics Wallah CEO Alakh Pandey, who argued that the NTA’s decision to award grace marks was arbitrary, supported by representations from about 20,000 students. Another petition by SIO members, Abdullah Mohammed Faiz and Dr. Shaik Roshan Mohiddin sought a recall of the NEET-UG 2024 results over alleged paper leaks and malpractices, with the court issuing a notice on this matter. It is essential to note that after allegations were raised against the grant of grace marks, the NTA and the Union Education Ministry had formed a four-member committee to review the results of the candidates awarded grace marks to compensate for the loss of time.

On the issue of grace marks: Advocate Kanu Agarwal, representing the Union Government, had stated that the panel reviewing the NEET-UG issue was of the view that the award of compensatory marks to 1563 students on the grounds of loss of time resulted in a “skewed situation” because the grace marks had to be limited only to the un-attempted questions. After examining all aspects, the committee concluded that it would be appropriate to recommend the cancellation of the scorecards of the 1563 students.

The court had scrutinised the NTA recommendations and found inconsistencies regarding the re-test clauses. Justice Mehta had emphasized the need to re-draft the clauses, noting, “You can’t declare the result of all 1563 candidates cancelled.”

The Supreme Court directed that only candidates genuinely affected by the reduced exam time should be eligible for the re-test, scheduled for June 23, 2024, with results to be declared by June 30 to avoid disrupting the counselling process starting on July 6. The Supreme Court’s order had stated that the petitioners raised concerns about the normalisation formula and the award of grace marks to 1563 candidates. Those who opt out of the re-exam will have their actual scores considered without compensatory marks. The decision to cancel the grace marks awarded to 1563 students was communicated by the Centre to the Supreme Court, with these students informed of their actual scores.

On halting the counselling process: The Supreme Court had clarified that the ongoing counselling process, which is scheduled to take place on July 6, would not be halted. Justice Nath had stated, “Counselling will go on, and we will not stop it. If the exam goes, then everything goes in totality, so nothing to fear.”

The order of the Supreme Court can be read here:

Arguments and observations made in the ongoing hearing

During the hearing on January 18, the vacation bench had clarified to Advocate Kanu Agarwal and Vardhaman Kaushik, representing the Union Government and the NTA respectively that even 0.001% negligence on the part of anyone needs to be thoroughly investigated. Justice Bhatti also highlighted that an investigation is important not only to ensure that the labour put in by students preparing for the exams but also because any candidate who becomes a doctor after playing fraud in the exam is more dangerous to the society.

“Imagine a situation where a person who has played fraud on the system, has become a doctor, he is more deleterious towards society….we all know the labour the children undergo especially for preparing for these exams.” Justice Bhatti remarked, as per LiveLaw.

Justice Bhatti also expressed that the NTA should act proactively and must admit if there is any mistake. This will re-instil the confidence of the public in the NEET examinations.

“Your stance (the NTA and Union) ought not to change the moment you enter the court, representing the Agency which is responsible for conducting the examination. You must stand firm- if there is a mistake, yes there is a mistake, this is the action we will take- at least that inspires confidence in your performance….if someone keeps just a table in front of him, find out the performance of most of the candidates, one can easily understand where it has gone wrong, how many cell phones were used…clearly we react, but in vacation we react slowly,” the Bench stated.

The case will now be heard on July 8 with the other matters. The Union Government as well as the NTA has been required to submit their response within two weeks.

The order of the Supreme Court can be read here:

Police investigations in Bihar, Gujarat

The National Eligibility Entrance Test of 2024, the largest medical admission test in India, has been in the headlines since the past few weeks. The numerous arrests, inquiries, judicial interventions, scams, protests and calls for justice in the wake of the purported paper leak have raised many fingers at the sanctity of this test as well as the negligence of the NTA. As more and more scandals related to NEET unfold, shocking and significant details have emerged from the state of Bihar and Gujarat.

Bihar:

It was from the state of Bihar that the reports of a paper leak had started surfacing. As provided by multiple media report, five minutes into the exam, the Patna police got a tip-off about a car belonging to an organised gang. The car had earlier taken 35 examinees to a playschool in Patna and leaked the paper.

As per the report of The Free Press Journal, an FIR had been registered at the Shastrinagar police station and police had recovered a scanned copy of the leaked paper sent to a young man in Danapur. The investigation by Patna police had also resulted in multiple arrests and unravelling of malpractices. The police also arrested four fake candidates in Purnia and one in Hajipur who had attempted to sit the exam on behalf of others.

As per reports, a total of 13 people belonging to Bihar have been arrested in connection with the alleged NEET-UG 2024 paper leak case. The Bihar Police have established the involvement of 35 students, 13 of whom have already come under their investigation while investigators are yet to identify the remaining 22.

According to sources, it is suspected that nine aspirants, along with four other examinees from Bihar, received the exam’s question paper and answers in a ‘safe house’ near Patna a day before it was conducted on May 5. Notably, they have already been arrested by the Economic Offences Unit (EOU).

During interrogation, the candidates had disclosed that their parents had paid more than Rs 30 lakh for every candidate to those who were facilitated question papers ahead of the exam. The EOU of Bihar Police had also recovered six post-dated cheques which were suspected to have been issued in favour of the mafia.

Gujarat:

On June 15, Gujarat Police arrested five persons, including the head of a coaching centre, in connection with alleged cheating in the medical examination in a centre in Godhra. As per the police complaint lodged in Godhra, around a dozen students, their parents and a Vadodara-based coaching centre run by a group of teachers were found to be involved in the alleged scam. The five arrested included the principal and teacher of a school in Godhra town in Gujarat’s Panchmahal district. The names of those arrested are:

1. Parshuram Roy, owner of the Roy Overseas Coaching Institute in Vadodara,
2. Vibhor Anand, an education consultant who got students admitted to Roy’s Institute,
3. Purshottam Sharma, the principal of Jai Jalaram School which was a NEET exam centre,
4. Tushar Bhatt, the deputy superintendent at the NEET centre who was a physics teacher at the school and
5. Arif Vora who worked with Bhatt

These five have been accused of trying to help 27 candidates clear the NEET-UG for a sum of ₹ 10 lakh each. As per the report of The Free Press Journal, some students had even paid over Rs 2 crore to the accused for getting their children admitted overseas.

As per Indian express, out of 27 students who had either paid in advance or agreed to pay money to Mr Roy and others, only three were able to clear the exam. Notably, the police informed the court that out of the 27 students who chose Godhra as their exam centre, 16 students hailed from Odisha, Jharkhand, Maharashtra and Karnataka.

It is essential to note that the FIR against this “racket” had been filed on May 9, after the district collector received a tip-off that some persons were involved in malpractice at the Godhra School designated as a centre for NEET-UG, held on May 5. As per the details that have emerged, students had been asked to opt for the Godhra centre so that the accused could then help the candidates by filling the answers to the questions left blank. As per The Print, a nexus between a coaching institute and staff at the exam centre where the NEET was conducted is emerging. The police are now, with the help of the NTA, trying to identify all the students who benefited from this organised cheating racket.

Uproar and protest by opposition over NEET continue

On June 19, the Indian National Congress (INC) party announced a nationwide protest on June 21, 2024 against the alleged NEET Scam. The said decision came after Congress leader Rahul Gandhi had bemoaned the silence of PM Modi over the scam and the allegations being raised against the conduct of the NTA.

On June 18, Gandhi had taken to X (formerly Twitter) and provided “As always, Narendra Modi is maintaining silence on the issue of playing with the future of more than 24 lakh students in the NEET exam. The arrests in Bihar, Gujarat and Haryana clearly indicate that there is systematic organised corruption in the examination and these BJP ruled states have become the epicentre of paper leaks. In our judicial document, we had guaranteed to secure the future of the youth by making a strict law against paper leaks.”

NEET परीक्षा में 24 लाख से अधिक छात्रों के भविष्य के साथ हुए खिलवाड़ पर भी नरेंद्र मोदी हमेशा की तरह मौन धारण किए हुए हैं।

बिहार, गुजरात और हरियाणा में हुई गिरफ्तारियों से साफ है कि परीक्षा में योजनाबद्ध तरीके से संगठित भ्रष्टाचार हुआ है और ये भाजपा शासित राज्य पेपर लीक का…

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) June 18, 2024

Reacting to the arrests made in Bihar, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge had also claimed that the Modi government has started “covering up the NEET scam” through Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and the NTA.

“If the paper was not leaked in NEET then — why were 13 accused arrested in Bihar due to paper leak? Did the Economic Offences Unit (EOU) of Patna police not expose the payment of Rs 30 lakh-Rs 50 lakh to the education mafia and organised gangs involved in the racket in exchange for papers?” he said in a post on X.

मोदी सरकार ने शिक्षा मंत्री व NTA के द्वारा NEET घोटाले की लीपापोती चालू कर दी है।

अगर NEET में पेपर लीक नहीं हुआ तो —

1. बिहार में 13 आरोपियों को पेपर लीक के चलते गिरफ़्तार क्यों किया गया?

क्या रैकेट में शामिल शिक्षा माफिया व संगठित गिरोह को पेपर के बदले ₹30-₹50 लाख तक… pic.twitter.com/r234FgUZes

— Mallikarjun Kharge (@kharge) June 14, 2024

Karnataka Deputy CM DK Shivakumar also attacked the union government and stated “The Karnataka government’s stand is that we are opposing it. It’s a huge scandal. I would like to congratulate Dharmendra Pradhan on his statement…It’s unfair to have a re-exam for a few students. It must be done for everyone.”

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders have been continuously protesting against the Union government and demanding an investigation on the NEET UG. The political party has been questioning the ruling party on alleged NEET paper leak since the beginning, and have amped up their protest since the hearing of the case in the Supreme Court.

NEET Exam में घोटाले के ख़िलाफ़ आज देशभर में AAP का हल्ला बोल pic.twitter.com/hwd64Gauzb

— AAP (@AamAadmiParty) June 19, 2024

आज छात्र और उनके माता-पिता सड़कों पर हैं। वह मांग कर रहे हैं कि NEET के Exam को दोबारा कराया जाए, लेकिन सरकार उनकी बात नहीं सुन रही है। वह लीपापोती में लगी हुई है।

देश के शिक्षा मंत्री NEET घोटाले को मानने की तैयार नहीं हैं। वह सोच रहे हैं कि लोग कितने दिन तक आवाज़ उठायेंगे,… pic.twitter.com/clhdZbGExl

— AAP (@AamAadmiParty) June 18, 2024

At a protest held at Jantar Matar, AAP leaders had stated that “NTA has betrayed the central government and the children of the country. Children’s dreams and future have been betrayed. Cases of paper leak also came to light in Bihar and Gujarat, but the central government remained silent. They kept trying to hide this fraud. The Central Government should conduct an independent investigation in this matter and it should be under the supervision of the Supreme Court. This is a question of the future of millions of children of 10th, 11th and 12th and AAP will strongly raise the voice of these children.”

#WATCH | Delhi | Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) holds protest against Union Government over NEET exam result issue, at Jantar Mantar pic.twitter.com/MbviAYlbsh

— ANI (@ANI) June 18, 2024

Related:

NEET 2024 Row: Supreme Court cancels grace marks, orders re-test for affected students

Scrutinising the procedure for awarding compensatory marks in NEET 2024

Students, organisations protest as allegations against NEET examinations pile up

NEET: An Exam only for Elites

The post SC asks NTA to ensure that even ‘0.001% negligence’ is investigated, while states of Bihar & Gujarat remain the epicentre of the NEET UG 2024 scandal appeared first on SabrangIndia.

D K Lobiyal, President of the JNU Teachers’ Association, said that selective promotions have been handed to the teachers who paid complete obeisance to the administration. “We are seeing that promotions have been denied to our colleagues, whereas some teachers have been given extensions as chairpersons and deans beyond the tenure of a vice-chancellor,” he said.

“Fourteen appointments of deans of different Schools of JNU have taken place since February 2022. Three of them involved the previous occupant of that office being reappointed to the same position, even for serving a third term. In another 10 cases, senior colleagues in their respective schools were bypassed, with the solitary exception being when the dean had to be appointed from outside the School concerned. In other words, rotation by order of seniority has not been followed in a single case,” he added.

Surajit Mazumdar, a professor of economics at the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, said that the situation is so bad that the chairpersons of different schools and centres do not know about the experts coming to interview the teachers for recruitment. He said, “The usual precedent remains that departments would prepare the list of experts and send it to the vice-chancellor, and she would choose certain names. However, we are seeing that experts are added to the list, and there is a complete disregard for the statutes of the university as well as the norms laid out by the University Grants Commission.”

Atul Sood, the former president of JNUTA, added that it appears that the administration has already approved the decisions, and the meetings of bodies like the Academic Council and the Executive Council are called to just report the items. “I was a member of the Executive Council, and it was strange that 27 items, which included the introduction of new courses, finished in half an hour. Former VC Jagadesh Mamidala used to call online meetings and would mute the mic if members wanted to express something. The tradition is going on with the current VC allowing select members to speak in the meetings. All universities have returned to pre-COVID norms for conducting physical meetings; whereas JNU remains the only university where such a practice is going on.

Moushumi Basu, who teaches at the Centre for International Politics, Organisation & Disarmament, said that the teachers have noticed a pattern where the National Testing Agency (NTA) is determining the academic calendar of the university. “We have seen that admissions to masters and PhD would be conducted through NTA. However, there is no compulsion to engage with NTA for entrance exams. We are seeing that semesters would end in a matter of three months. I think it’s cheating our students and nations that we are compelling [students] to take exams without proper studies.”

Another fallout of it remains the reduction in the number of girl students in the university. The teachers emphasised that the percentage of girl students has plunged from 51.4% in 2017-18 to 44.4% in 2021-22. Similarly, the share of research students has decreased from 62.2% in 2016-17 to 46% in 2021-22.

The JNUTA, in a press statement, said that the process of destruction of the University unleashed in 2016 has continued unabated, even after the change of the Vice Chancellor in February 2022. This destruction involves the erosion of the institutional and academic ethos of the University and the undermining of its role as a promoter of social equity – the hallmarks of the University which were integral to establishing it as a premier higher education institution.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post JNU Teachers Allege Academic Erosion; Highlight ‘Arbitrary’ Policies for Recruitment and Promotions appeared first on SabrangIndia.