Did the SC Reject the Plea Against NEET-UG 2025 Answer Key and Results?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Supreme Court's recent decision to dismiss a plea regarding the NEET-UG 2025 results raises significant questions about the examination's integrity. As the controversy unfolds, candidates are left to ponder the implications for their future in medical education. Explore this critical legal battle and its consequences for aspiring medical students.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court upheld the NEET-UG 2025 results.
- Multiple correct answers for questions were acknowledged.
- Significant discrepancies were noted in previous NEET examinations.
- The petitioner's arguments were based on recognized academic resources.
- The ruling may impact candidates' future opportunities.
New Delhi, July 4 (NationPress) The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition questioning the final answer key and results of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test-undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2025, which were issued by the National Testing Agency (NTA). The court noted that multiple correct answers may exist for particular questions, and the Bench, comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan, decided against interfering with the results of this national examination at such a late stage based on an individual’s petition.
The petitioner's attorney referenced a previous ruling by the apex court that required the NTA to reassess candidates’ scores due to concerns raised by an expert panel from IIT Delhi regarding a controversial physics question.
Despite this, the Bench, led by Justice Narasimha, insisted on maintaining their decision, stating that last year's ruling was justified due to significant irregularities noted during the NEET-UG 2024 examination.
The recent writ petition, filed by advocate Sriram P., sought judicial action against the NTA's perceived “arbitrary” and “incorrect” announcement of the answer key and results, despite the presence of well-supported objections from credible academic sources.
According to the writ, the refusal to amend clearly erroneous answers has resulted in a serious miscarriage of justice and an unconstitutional denial of marks, which has negatively impacted the petitioner’s merit ranking and future career prospects.
Referencing the NCERT Biology textbook for Class 11, the petition highlighted that cortisol, an adrenal cortical hormone, is involved in maintaining the cardiovascular system. Hence, the authorities have made a mistake by not awarding marks for Question No. 136.
The petitioner sought a stay on the results, asserting that a total of 5 marks (4 marks plus 1 mark deducted for an incorrect answer) would significantly influence their rank for admission into a better medical college.
It is worth noting that the Supreme Court had recently dismissed a similar petition challenging the NEET-UG 2025 answer key.
Point of View
It is crucial to recognize the implications of the Supreme Court's ruling on NEET-UG 2025. This decision underscores the necessity for transparent examination processes and the importance of addressing genuine concerns raised by candidates. Upholding the integrity of educational assessments is paramount to ensuring a fair opportunity for all aspirants in their pursuit of medical careers.
NationPress
26/07/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the outcome of the Supreme Court's ruling on NEET-UG 2025?
The Supreme Court rejected the plea questioning the final answer key and results of NEET-UG 2025, stating that they would not interfere at this stage.
Why was the petition filed?
The petition was filed to challenge the NTA's declaration of the answer key and results, claiming it was arbitrary and erroneous.
Did the Supreme Court consider previous rulings?
Yes, the court referenced a prior ruling that required the NTA to reassess scores due to discrepancies noted in NEET-UG 2024.
How might this ruling affect students?
The ruling could significantly impact students' merit rankings and their chances of securing admission to medical colleges.
What specific concerns were raised in the petition?
The petitioner cited specific errors in the answer key, referring to academic sources that supported their claims.
