Supreme Court to Examine NEET-PG Answer Key Transparency Challenge

The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) on September 1, 2023, concerning the transparency of answer keys in the NEET-PG 2025 examination. This PIL was filed by a group of medical graduates challenging a “corrective notice” issued by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) on August 21.

The petitioners, who are qualified doctors, argue that the new disclosure mechanism for answer keys lacks clarity and is “opaque, unintelligible, and incapable of meaningful verification.” They contend that the amended system, which mandates that candidate responses and answer keys be displayed only with reference to ‘Question ID Numbers’, compromises their ability to validate their performance.

The petition emphasizes that this approach limits candidates’ visibility into their actual responses. Given that the examination employed shuffled questions and answer options, the petitioners assert it denies them a “clear and candidate-wise mapped view” of their attempts. They stress that this format undermines the purpose of publishing answer keys, which is intended to allow candidates to verify their answers, raise objections to discrepancies, and ensure transparency in the evaluation process of a high-stakes national examination.

Legal representation for the petitioners, led by advocate Satyam Singh, clarifies that their grievance is centered around the format of disclosure rather than a request for re-evaluation of answer sheets. The petition specifically calls for the disclosure of:

1. The questions in the order attempted by each candidate
2. The candidates’ responses
3. The official correct answers
4. The marks awarded

According to the petition, the current system of only publishing Question IDs renders the information “illusory and non-verifiable.” It argues that this violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution by denying candidates a fair and transparent admission process.

The petition also references prior judicial directives aimed at increasing transparency in the NEET-PG evaluation process. Previously, the Supreme Court had mandated the disclosure of raw scores, answer keys, and the normalization formula used for scoring. Additionally, the petition notes that other competitive examinations, such as IIT-JEE, CLAT, and AIIMS INI-CET, follow candidate-wise response disclosure practices, adding weight to their argument for reform.

With a significant number of medical graduates vying for a limited number of postgraduate seats, the petitioners assert that unless the Supreme Court intervenes, the integrity of the NEET-PG examination will be compromised. They seek a declaration that the NBEMS’ corrective notice is unconstitutional and request that the court direct the publication of actual questions as seen by each candidate, along with the corresponding correct answers and marked responses.

As the case awaits hearing, the outcome could have substantial implications for future examinations and the transparency of the medical admissions process in India.