NEET 2024 Results Controversy: The National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) 2024 results have sparked significant controversy and debate, stirring up concerns among parents, students, and educators. The uproar occurred for new changes as suggested by the National Testing Agency (NTA) as a legitimate one, whereas many candidates and even top educators such as Alakh Pandey, who is the CEO of Physics Wallah (an Online ed-tech platform that provides coaching for JEE, NEET and other competitive exams) and NV Nitin who is founder and CEO of Motion KOTA coaching classes in Kota, Rajasthan have voiced down their opinions regarding the allegations of discrepancies by NTA.
Many Public Interest Litigations (PILs) are being also filed, and several other educators are raising student-related issues even at the highest level of the judiciary. Despite this, many students, other aspirants, parents, and teachers remain confused about the situation. Here we have tried to explain the whole situation simply.
Also Read: Cotton University PG Entrance Exam: Download Previous Year’s Question Papers now
NEET 2024 Results Controversy: Key Issues
The NEET 2024 Results Controversy has arisen due to some key decisions made by the National Testing Agency (NTA) when announcing the results of NEET 2024. Specifically, the issues include the methods used for calculating scores and discrepancies in the results. These concerns have led to a wave of complaints and legal actions as people seek fair and transparent handling of the exam results.
Controversial Grace Marks
The main controversy is the issue of grace marks awarded to certain students. Multiple petitions were filed before the high courts of Punjab and Haryana, Delhi, and Chhattisgarh, citing disruptions and loss of exam time at various centres. The National Testing Agency (NTA) responded by compensating 1,563 candidates with grace marks. This adjustment, which varied significantly—from deductions to full marks—has stirred discontent among students and coaching institutes.
The NTA justified its actions by stating that the compensatory marks were necessary to address the verified concerns of lost examination time. However, clarity on the normalization procedure for these grace marks is essential, as reports indicate that some students received as many as 60-70 grace marks. This large-scale adjustment of marks disrupts the overall merit list, potentially disadvantaging many students.
Critics argue that the distribution of grace marks, due to failures in exam conduct, has not only confused students but also called into question the NTA’s functioning. Students typically arrive at exam centres an hour early, so the delays in receiving question papers are puzzling and concerning.
Perfect Scores rise to 67!
Adding to the previous controversy, the most startling revelation from the NEET 2024 results is the staggering number of students who achieved a perfect score of 720. This year, 67 students reached this pinnacle, a dramatic increase from just three students in 2023. While in theory, achieving a perfect score is possible, the sudden surge has raised eyebrows and suspicions among many stakeholders, particularly parents. The situation becomes even more concerning with reports that six of these perfect scorers are from the same exam centre in Haryana. This anomaly has led to questions about the integrity and fairness of the examination process.
Unclear Marking Scheme and NCERT Textbooks
The third major issue involves the marking scheme related to the use of different NCERT textbooks for setting the NEET question papers. The NTA official, as quoted by various other sources, that the question paper was based on the new NCERT textbooks, while many students had prepared using the old versions. In response to complaints, the NTA awarded five marks to all students who had chosen one of the two possible options for a particular question. This decision resulted in the scores of many students rising to a perfect 720, further inflating the number of toppers.
Parents, students, and educators have criticized this move, arguing that the lack of clear communication about which textbooks to use for preparation was unfair. They contend that the decision to award additional marks was a makeshift solution that failed to address the root problem, ultimately disadvantaging many well-prepared students.
Allegation of Unfair Means (UFM)
Allegations of paper leaks during the NEET examination have caused significant confusion among students. Initially, the NTA denied these claims but later acknowledged taking appropriate actions against unfair means. Despite issuing clarifications and supporting ongoing investigations, the mixed messages have left students uncertain about the integrity of the exam process and the validity of their results.
NTA’s reply to all allegation
As per NTA’s defence, regarding the Grace Marks issue, the loss of examination time was assessed, and affected candidates were compensated with marks based on their answering efficiency and the time lost. This was done according to a formula established by the Supreme Court in its judgment dated June 13, 2018, in W.P. 551 of 2018. The case that has been referred by NTA i.e., Disha Panchal vs Union Of India The Secretary on 13 June 2018 (W.P. 551 of 2018), was based on the discrepancy of CLAT results and certain rules and regulations were given regarding such a similar situation. The details regarding W.P 551 of 2018 of Disha Panchal vs Union Of India, The Secretary have been detailed below.
However many students see this as a grave injustice. A total of 1563 candidates received compensatory marks, ranging from -20 to 720. That clarity of Grace Marks was not justified. Even the judgement is based on the discrepancy of Computer Based Test (CBT) not regarding the offline exams. During the marking of students with Grace Marks, two candidates scored 718 and 719 marks respectively due to these compensations, which have made other candidates furious.
Regarding Unfair Means, as mentioned earlier, the NTA has followed existing rules, including cancelling candidatures and barring individuals from future exams. Legal action has been taken against impersonators, with cases registered by both the NTA and state police. The NTA is actively supporting investigations related to NEET (UG) 2024. Despite ongoing investigations, the NTA has firmly denied any instances of paper leaks. On May 6, 2024, a detailed press release was issued, clarifying that rumours of a paper leak circulating on social media were unfounded. The NTA maintains that the integrity of the examination remains intact.
Conclusion
The NEET 2024 results have undeniably triggered a wave of controversy and dissatisfaction across the country. With a record number of perfect scores, contentious grace marks, and an unclear marking scheme, the credibility of the examination process is under scrutiny. As stakeholders call for greater transparency and fairness, the NTA faces significant pressure to review and possibly overhaul its procedures to restore trust in one of India’s most crucial entrance exams. The hope is that these issues will prompt necessary reforms, ensuring a more transparent and equitable process for future candidates.
The tragic rise in student suicides, especially in Kota due to NEET pressures, highlights the inefficiency of the current system. Despite calls for action from opposition leaders like Rahul Gandhi, the ruling party has yet to implement effective solutions. These incidents underscore the urgent need for reform. Various stakeholders, including coaching centres, have taken the issue to the judiciary, seeking intervention and change. The government must act swiftly to address these concerns and establish a supportive and fair environment for students. Comprehensive measures are needed to prevent further tragedies and ensure the well-being of aspiring students.
Important Links
| NTA NEET Official Website |
| NEET 2024 Results Controversy: NTA’s justification |
| W.P. 551 of 2018 (Disha Panchal vs Union Of India) |
| NTA NEET 2024 Results statistics |
| NEET UG Results Live |
For more educational news, click here
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
