CBSE restrained from declaring NEET results

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday restrained the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) from declaring the results of National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) until June 7.

Justice M.V. Muralidaran granted the interim injunction on the ground that different question papers set for the NEET held in 10 languages would lead to discrimination between students.

The order was passed on a writ petition filed by a group of nine students from Madurai seeking a direction to the Central government to cancel the NEET conducted on May 7 for admission to undergraduate medical courses. They argued that the CBSE, by framing different question papers, had denied them a level playing field. Instead, the Board could have translated a common question paper.

When the case came up before Justice N. Seshasayee last week, he refused to grant any kind of interim order but for ordering notice to the CBSE, which had conducted the test in English, Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Hindi, Marathi, Bengali, Gujarati, Odia and Assamese.

In an affidavit filed on behalf of students S. Jonila, P. Surya, P. Siddarth, K. Ajay Sharan, S. Nitin Prakash Sivasubramanian, Gautham Sankar, J. Aditya, D. Richard Rishaban Dass and M. Naveen Kumar, it was stated that all of them had written the NEET this month in English on the basis of uniform syllabus.

They were shocked to learn subsequently that the question paper was not uniform across the country.

The petition claimed that the paper in Tamil was much easier than in English. The students argued: “One India, one question paper is a must in NEET. Otherwise, assessment of intelligence and aptitude will differ. Further, an uneven playing field would infringe the right to equal opportunity in education.”

Students in Maharashtra, Karnataka and West Bengal too were agitated over different question papers having been prepared in different languages, they claimed.

Accusing the CBSE of maintaining a stoic silence on the issue, they contended: “If dissimilar gauging is permitted, candidates with lower ability would benefit and those with higher ability would get ousted from competition.”

This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Printable version | Apr 15, 2021 4:59:03 PM |

Next Story