Data analytics of the NEET-UG 2024 results by IIT-Madras found “no abnormality” and showed “no indication of mass malpractice or localized candidates benefitting leading to abnormal scores,” the Centre informed the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
On Monday, the court asked if data analytics could identify suspect cases and separate tainted students from untainted ones. In response, the Centre’s affidavit stated that the Department of Higher Education had asked IIT-Madras to perform this analysis. They were also requested to determine through data analytics if there were any suspected cases of wrongdoing and other red flags.
IIT-Madras conducted an exhaustive technical evaluation of the NEET-UG 2024 data, using parameters like marks distribution, city-wise and center-wise rank distribution, and candidates spread over the marks range. The analysis revealed that “the marks distribution follows the bell-shaped curve typical of large-scale exams, indicating no abnormality.”
City-wise and center-wise analysis for 2023 and 2024 was performed for the top 1.4 lakh ranks, considering that the total number of seats across the country is around 1.1 lakh. This analysis was detailed enough to detect any abnormality, such as if a large number of students had secured high ranks due to malpractice or if specific centers or cities benefitted. The analysis showed “no indication of mass malpractice or localized candidates benefitting leading to abnormal scores.”
There was an overall increase in marks, particularly in the range of 550 to 720, attributed to a 25% reduction in the syllabus. Additionally, candidates obtaining high marks were spread across multiple cities and centers, indicating a very low likelihood of malpractice.
The Centre stated that if the National Testing Agency (NTA) and the Union Government needed to identify further beneficiaries of question paper leakage, a policy decision on the status of the counseling would be required. Counseling will be conducted in four rounds starting from the third week of July. Any candidate found to have benefitted from malpractice will have their candidature canceled at any stage during the counseling process or afterward.
In a separate affidavit, the NTA mentioned that regarding the “alleged question paper related incident at Patna,” the Bihar police had provided a list of 17 candidates. The NTA withheld these candidates’ results after issuing show cause notices. The performance assessment of these 17 candidates showed a moderate to below-average impact on the exam at that center.
In Godhra, Gujarat, where allegations of wrongdoing surfaced, the district administration and police provided a list of 30 candidates. The results of these candidates were withheld after show cause notices were issued.
To ensure the sanctity of future exams, the NTA is considering converting from pen-and-paper mode to computer-based test (CBT) mode, among other options to prevent malpractices.
Regarding the claim that the question paper was leaked on a Telegram channel, the NTA stated that discussions within the channel identified the video as fake, with the timestamp manipulated to create a false impression of an early leak.
Security measures for the exam reported 153 cases of unfair means. After due process, 81 candidates had their results withheld, and 54 candidates were debarred for up to three years. There are currently 16 FIRs registered regarding NEET-UG 2024, with 14 registered in different exam cities by exam functionaries at the NTA’s behest.
The NTA also clarified that the claim that 67 students scored 720 out of 720 was “fallacious and incorrect.” Only 6 out of these 67 scored 720 due to grace marks from the Jhajjar center, and none scored 720 in the retest. Thus, only 61 candidates achieved a perfect score, with 17 scoring 720 based on provisional answer keys and 44 due to a revision in one Physics answer key. These 61 candidates were spread across 58 centers in 41 cities.
A bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud is set to hear on Thursday several pleas related to the medical entrance exam, including those alleging irregularities and malpractices in the May 5 test and seeking to conduct it afresh.
While hearing the matter on Monday, the SC noted that the exam’s sanctity had been “breached.” However, ordering a retest depended on whether the breach was systemic and affected the entire process and whether it was possible to segregate fraud beneficiaries from untainted students.