Data analytics at heart of Supreme Court verdict on NEET violation | Latest News India

Based on a thorough analysis of data, legal principles and practical implications of a review order, the Supreme Court on Friday delivered its detailed judgment concluding that there was no systemic violation in the conduct of NEET-UG 2024, despite allegations of malpractice, including leakage of exam papers.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud examined the allegations surrounding the NEET, noting that while there were incidents of malpractice, these issues did not reach a level that would warrant the cancellation of the exam in its entirety.

“The facts of this case and the issue arising before this Court do not require the elaboration of new legal principles. It is settled law that quashing of an examination… is justified only in cases where the sanctity of the examination is compromised at a systemic level,” the Court, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, said.

Stressing that such draconian measures are justified only when it is impossible to separate corrupt candidates from the non-corrupt ones, the court stressed that it is possible to separate the beneficiaries of the fraud from the honest students in the present case. “In these conditions, the court cannot order a review,” it said.

A significant portion of the judgment was devoted to analyzing data from several exam centers accused of malfeasance. The court scrutinized the pass rates of these centers, comparing them with data from previous years to detect possible anomalies.

For instance, in Hazaribagh, a centre that was under scrutiny for document leaks, the pass rate for candidates in rank 108,000 was 4.6 per cent in 2024, compared to 7.2 per cent in 2022 and 6.0 per cent in 2023. The court found that the pass rate for 2024 was actually lower than in previous years, which does not indicate any anomalies or systemic violations. “From the above figures, it is clear that there is no anomaly in the results of 2024 as compared to the results of the last two years,” it noted.

Similarly, data from Patna and Godhra, other centres under scrutiny for document leaks and OMR sheet issues, also did not reveal any systemic irregularities. In Patna, the pass rate for 2024 was 5.5 per cent, lower than 8.9 per cent in 2022 and 7.7 per cent in 2023. In Godhra, the pass rate for 2024 was 0.8 per cent, down from 1.5 per cent in 2022 and 2.1 per cent in 2023. The court concluded that these figures did not indicate any systemic problem. “There are no other discrepancies in the data that are of concern and meet the standard of indicating systemic malaise,” the judgment said.

The IIT-Madras director’s report confirmed the tribunal’s findings. The report found “no abnormal indication” in the 2024 results compared to previous years, saying “the analysis shows that there is no indication of mass malpractice or a localised cluster of candidates benefiting from abnormal results”.

Another aspect considered by the court was the reopening of the registration period, which had raised concerns about possible malpractice. The registration period was initially open from February 9 to March 9, 2024, and was later extended to March 16, 2024. However, the NTA reopened the registration portal for two more days – April 9 and 10, 2024 – citing technical glitches faced by candidates.

The applicants argued that the reopening facilitated malfeasance, but the court found no evidence to support this claim. The data revealed that the pass rates of candidates who registered during the reopening period were not abnormal. Of the 14,007 candidates who applied after registering on April 10, 44 were in the top 108,000 ranks and 23 were in the top 56,000 ranks, with pass rates of 0.31% and 0.14%, respectively.

In response to concerns about candidates changing test centres, which some have argued was done to facilitate cheating, the Court again relied on data analysis that found no abnormal success rates for candidates who changed centres. “The choice to sit the examination from another city can be motivated by a multitude of factors… Other relevant and concrete elements must be present before the Court can infer that this led to massive fraud,” it concluded.

The court also cited a lack of evidence that the questionnaire was widely distributed via social media or the Internet, or that responses were communicated to students through sophisticated electronic means that might be difficult to trace.

“The students who benefited from the leakage in Hazaribagh and Patna can be identified. The CBI investigation reveals the number of students who are the beneficiaries of the malpractice in Hazaribagh and Patna at this stage. This leads us to conclude that it is possible to distinguish the beneficiaries of the malpractice or fraud from the honest students,” he concluded.

The judgment stressed the importance of a proportionate response to malpractice. Ordering a re-examination, the court noted, would have disrupted the academic calendar. “The delay in finalising admission will impact the availability of resident doctors to care for patients in the future. Any such directive will have a disproportionate impact on candidates from marginalised backgrounds,” it said.