Answer key will have to be submitted to NTA
During the hearing of the case, Justice Amanullah said that in this case the sanctity of the examination is affected and in such a situation we want a reply from NTA. The Supreme Court asked the NTA lawyer how much time he needs to answer. You file the reply as soon as the court opens otherwise the counseling will start. Earlier in the Supreme Court, the NTA lawyer argued that the NEET exam has already been challenged and on May 17, a bench headed by the Chief Justice had issued a notice, so this petition should be tagged with the same petition. That petition has been listed for hearing on July 8. The Supreme Court has fixed July 8 as the date for hearing on the current petition.
PressNews24 provides latest news, bollywood news, breaking news hollywood, top tech news, business standard news, indian economy news, world economy news, travel news, mumbai news, latest news mumbai loksabha election 2024, video viral news, delhi news, Only at PressNews24.in
No restrictions on consultation
Earlier on Tuesday, when the hearing of the case began, lawyer Mathew J Nedumpara appeared on behalf of the petitioners and said that the counseling to be held after the NEET result should be stopped. Supreme Court Justice Nath said that let the counseling begin, we will not stop it. But we will issue a notice in the matter and NTA should file a reply. In this case, petitioner Shivangi Mishra and 9 others had filed a petition on June 1. The petition was filed even before the result was declared. After the result was declared, another petition was also filed in the Supreme Court and during this time the matter of grace marks given by NTA and 67 toppers from a particular center was raised in the petition. However, the petition after the result was not listed for hearing on Tuesday.
Allegation of NEET paper leak in the petition
The petition filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner Shivangi and others states that the NEET paper has been leaked and thus the sanctity of the examination held on May 5 has been doubted, in such a situation this exam should be canceled and the exam should be conducted again. It has been said on behalf of the petitioners that there has been a disturbance in the examination and many incidents of paper leak have come to the notice of the petitioners. Paper leak is a violation of Article 14 as it benefits many candidates. The petition has requested to cancel the examination.
Earlier, at the beginning of the hearing, advocate J Sai Deepak raised the matter and said that the NEET result has been challenged. Then Justice Vikram Nath said that you mention the new petition before the registry and it will be listed for hearing through the Chief Justice. During this, the lawyer said that counseling should be stopped as it is about to start. Then the Justice said that you raise the issue before the registry. During this, the lawyer said that his petition challenging the NEET result should be tagged with the already listed petition. After this, Justice Nath said that for this also you will have to mention it before the registry.
Allegations of arbitrary grant of ex-gratia in NEET exam
On June 10, the petitioner had said that giving grace in this manner is illegal and arbitrary and it is a violation of Articles 14 and 21. Also, it has been said in the petition that the examination was held offline and in such a situation there is no account of how much time wasted. Also, alleging irregularities in the NEET exam, a plea has been made to the Supreme Court that the result of NEET UG 2024 be withdrawn and the exam be taken again. A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court saying that grace has been given arbitrarily in the NEET exam and this is a system of entry through the back door. It has also been said that 67 students of a particular center have been toppers. A plea has been made for an SIT inquiry into the matter. Another petition related to this was filed in the Supreme Court on May 17. The Supreme Court had refused to stay the exam result. In this case, a bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud had issued notice to the respondent on the petitioner's application and fixed July for hearing.