Answer Key Controversy
The central point of contention revolves around the format of the NEET PG answer key. The NBEMS, acting on a Supreme Court mandate, initially released
the answer key. However, instead of providing the complete question papers and detailed answer keys, the NBEMS opted to release only "answer key IDs." This approach has sparked significant criticism from the candidates. They argue that this limited information hinders their ability to thoroughly review their answers and verify the evaluation process. Such a lack of clarity leads to doubts and concerns about the overall fairness of the evaluation system. Candidates are seeking a more transparent approach from the NBEMS to ensure a fair and accurate assessment of their performance. This situation has prompted the filing of petitions and a legal review of the process.
Candidate Objections Raised
Candidates express significant dissatisfaction with the method of answer key disclosure. They believe that the current system is "opaque, unintelligible and incapable of meaningful verification." This limited information restricts their ability to challenge answers or understand the rationale behind the scoring. The argument is that this lack of transparency directly violates their right to a fair admission process, as guaranteed by Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The core problem, as highlighted in the petitions, is that the release of only answer key IDs negates the purpose of publishing answer keys altogether. A key function of answer keys is to empower candidates to cross-check their answers effectively and raise any objections they may have. Therefore, the current approach is seen as a major impediment to fair evaluation and a violation of the candidate's rights.
Legal Proceedings Unfold
The NEET PG 2025 counselling process has been paused due to the legal proceedings. The Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) is yet to announce the dates for the All India Quota counselling, which governs 50% of seats in MD, MS, and PG Diploma courses. Meanwhile, some states like Gujarat, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu have initiated their state quota counselling registration. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear petitions on September 19, after rescheduling from September 12. The hearing will be conducted by Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan. These petitions, filed by NEET PG candidates and the United Doctors Front (UDF), highlight the need for greater transparency in the examination process. The legal action is focused on addressing the specific concerns regarding the answer key format and ensuring fair evaluation.
Previous Supreme Court Directives
The current legal situation stems from previous directives issued by the Supreme Court. On April 29, the Supreme Court mandated NBE to publish raw scores, answer keys, and the normalization formula. Candidates now allege that the NBEMS has deviated from this order, particularly with the limited release of only answer key IDs. The United Doctors Front (UDF), one of the petitioners, had previously opposed the NBE's decision to hold NEET PG 2025 in two shifts and the use of a normalization formula. Following this, NBEMS issued a "corrective notice" on August 21, which is currently under legal review. These events underscore the significance of adherence to the court's directives and the importance of maintaining transparency in the examination process.
Key Concerns Summarized
The primary concerns center around the format of the answer key and its implications for fair evaluation. The candidates' core complaint is that the release of only question IDs severely restricts their ability to verify their answers properly. They perceive this lack of transparency as a violation of their right to a fair admission process, under the constitution. Furthermore, the ongoing legal proceedings and the Supreme Court hearings underscore the importance of addressing these concerns. The UDF's active involvement, along with the previous directives from the court, highlight the need for greater clarity. The crux of the matter is the candidates' claim that the current system is opaque, unintelligible, and frustrates the very purpose of publishing answer keys.
