The Supreme Court has stressed that reforms in the National Testing Agency (NTA) must be institutionalised and cannot depend on individual officers or be repeatedly revisited through successive committees. The Court directed the Centre to file an affidavit setting out the progress made in implementing the recommendations of the K. Radhakrishnan Committee, including the modifications proposed by the newly constituted committee.
A Bench comprising Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe was hearing the matter concerning NEET-UG examination reforms and paper-leak concerns. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the NTA, while Advocates-on-Record Tanvi Dubey appeared for the Federation of All India Medical Association (FAIMA) and AoR Charu Mathur appeared for UDF- United Doctors Front.
During the hearing, SG Tushar Mehta explained the elaborate safeguards presently followed by the NTA for preparation, printing, transportation, storage and distribution of question papers. He submitted that the process involves multiple moderators preparing and selecting questions, four sets of question papers being prepared, two being ultimately selected, and the papers being sent to separate identified printers under CCTV surveillance and security.
SG further explained that the question papers are transported under police escort and GPS tracking and stored in separate bank strong rooms. On the examination day, one set is selected, transported to examination centres under security and opened in the presence of officials and students, with the process being videographed. He submitted that the system leaves a footprint everywhere, making it possible to identify where a breach occurred.
The Bench, however, observed that these very processes had already been examined by the Radhakrishnan Committee.
The Court clarified that its concern was not merely with the ‘nitty-gritties’ of the existing process but with how those safeguards are converted into a permanent institutional mechanism.
The Bench emphasised that personnel must be trained and prepared for future examinations and not merely for one examination, stressing the need to preserve institutional expertise.
The Court also questioned the implementation of the Radhakrishnan Committee’s recommendations relating to the NTA’s institutional structure, including specialised verticals for digital infrastructure, testing infrastructure, research and development, cybersecurity and other examination-related functions.
The Bench particularly stressed the importance of institutional memory, observing that experienced officers are transferred and their accumulated expertise can otherwise be lost. The Court said that experience must flow to the next level so that the institution can build upon what has already been developed.
FAIMA’s submissions centred on the same concern. It questioned why a fresh committee had been constituted when the Radhakrishnan Committee had already made detailed recommendations on examination reforms. FAIMA submitted that students cannot be expected to face recurring examination irregularities followed by the constitution of a new committee each time, without ensuring implementation of recommendations already made.
The Bench agreed that there must be continuity between the earlier and new committees. It observed:
“
“You can’t get into this committee’s recommendations and then lock and barrel leave it and have another committee start afresh. There must be some continuity. They can improve upon it without diluting it.”
The Court also suggested that Dr. K. Radhakrishnan could be associated with the new committee, subject to his health permitting, so that the institutional knowledge from the earlier exercise is retained.
The Bench made clear that it was not seeking to micromanage the NTA, stating that its duty was to ensure that there is a vibrant institution for the country to be proud of.
The Court also examined the NTA’s claims regarding its present infrastructure and manpower. Mehta submitted that the NTA has been provided secure physical infrastructure, its own GPUs and servers, backup systems and a technology team being developed with support from NIC and C-DAC. He also informed the Court about recruitment and appointments to key technical and financial positions.
On the question of whether examinations should move towards a computer-based testing (CBT) model, the Bench noted that the Radhakrishnan Committee had considered the issue and had identified the physical mode as one of the vulnerable links in the examination supply chain. The Court indicated that the technological and security alternatives would have to be examined by the committee.
The Bench ultimately directed the Secretary of the Ministry concerned to file an affidavit within three weeks, setting out the steps taken to implement the Radhakrishnan Committee’s recommendations and indicating the modifications made by the new committee.
The affidavit is also to detail the progress made towards institutionalising the NTA with the necessary manpower, physical infrastructure, technological capabilities and security mechanisms.
The Court made clear that its central concern was continuity and institutionalisation, rather than merely putting safeguards in place for an individual examination.