SimonK54990761: Info

2026-01-07T13:06:40Z

Info

New page

{{Short description|Indian ministry controversies}}
{{more footnotes|date=November 2025}}
The '''[[National Testing Agency]]''' ('''NTA''') is an autonomous body under [[Department of Higher Education (India)|Department of Higher Education]] of the [[Ministry of Education (India)|Ministry of Education]] of India. It has often been in controversy, multiple news reports including [[The Times of India]], [[India Today]], [[Scroll.in]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=Deeksha |first=Johanna |date=2025-06-10 |title=Why the National Testing Agency continues to fail students in India |url=https://scroll.in/article/1083283/why-the-national-testing-agency-continues-to-fail-students-in-india |access-date=2025-11-03 |website=Scroll.in |language=en}}</ref> have reported that the agency has faced issues such as paper leaks, unfair grace marks, and technical or administrative problems at exam centres. Critics have also questioned how the NTA is managed, saying it lacks transparency and public accountability. Because of these problems, many court cases have been filed against it, and the government has announced reviews and possible reforms to improve its functioning.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-11-28 |title=5 times NTA found itself in troubled waters |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/5-times-nta-found-itself-in-troubled-waters/articleshow/115775950.cms?utm_source=chatgpt.com |access-date=2025-11-03 |work=The Times of India |issn=0971-8257}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Sharma |first=Yashraj |title=Millions of students at risk: India’s elite exams hit by corruption ‘scam’ |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/6/21/millions-of-students-at-risk-indias-elite-exams-hit-by-corruption-scam |access-date=2025-11-03 |website=Al Jazeera |language=en}}</ref>

== JEE (Main) 2020 Assam topper scam ==

In 2020, Neel Nakshatra Das, a candidate for JEE Mains used a substitute to give the exam. He subsequently scored 99.8 percentile in the exam and topped in his state, Assam.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/prime-accused-in-jee-fraud-case-absconding-in-assam/article32981499.ece|title=Prime accused in JEE fraud case absconding in Assam|newspaper=The Hindu|date=October 30, 2020|via=www.thehindu.com|access-date=November 2, 2020|archive-date=November 3, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201103102036/https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/prime-accused-in-jee-fraud-case-absconding-in-assam/article32981499.ece|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/education/news/prime-accused-in-assam-jee-main-scam-arrested/articleshow/78992156.cms|title=Prime accused in Assam JEE Main scam arrested - Times of India|website=The Times of India|date=2 November 2020|access-date=2 November 2020|archive-date=2 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201102050517/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/education/news/prime-accused-in-assam-jee-main-scam-arrested/articleshow/78992156.cms|url-status=live}}</ref> Seven people have been arrested, including Bhargav Deka, the owner of a city-based coaching institute, Global Edu Light and [[Tata Consultancy Services]] employees <ref>Tata Consultancy Services provides infrastructural and human resources support to the NTA for conducting the exams.</ref> The candidate (Neel Nakshatra Das), Neel's father, Jyotirmoy Das, and an invigilator.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/prime-accused-in-assam-jee-main-scam-arrested-from-guwahati-airport-2319154|title=Prime Accused In Assam JEE (Main) Scam Arrested From Guwahati Airport|website=NDTV.com|access-date=2020-11-02|archive-date=2020-11-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201102070539/https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/prime-accused-in-assam-jee-main-scam-arrested-from-guwahati-airport-2319154|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-jee-scam-assam-police-launch-manhunt-to-nab-coaching-centre-owner-it-professional-2853447|title=JEE scam: Assam Police launch manhunt to nab coaching centre owner, IT professional|date=October 31, 2020|website=DNA India|access-date=November 2, 2020|archive-date=November 1, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201101023333/https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-jee-scam-assam-police-launch-manhunt-to-nab-coaching-centre-owner-it-professional-2853447|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/crime/301020/jee-topper-used-proxy-to-write-paper-arrested.html|title=JEE topper used proxy to write paper, arrested|first=manoj|last=anand|date=October 30, 2020|website=Deccan Chronicle|access-date=November 2, 2020|archive-date=November 2, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201102091421/http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/crime/301020/jee-topper-used-proxy-to-write-paper-arrested.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

== NEET (UG) 2020 discrepancies ==
In the [[National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (Undergraduate)|NEET (UG)]] 2020 exam, the NTA incorrectly declared that Vidhi Suryavanshi of [[Madhya Pradesh]]'s [[Chhindwara]] district had only scored 6 marks which were later found out to be false after Vidhi committed suicide.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2020/oct/24/teen-hangs-self-after-6-marks-in-neet-omr-sheet-reveals-actual-score-590-2214399.html|title=MP teen hangs self after 6 marks in NEET; OMR sheet reveals actual score 590|website=The New Indian Express|date=24 October 2020|access-date=26 October 2020|archive-date=27 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201027114444/https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2020/oct/24/teen-hangs-self-after-6-marks-in-neet-omr-sheet-reveals-actual-score-590-2214399.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-neet-results-2020-18-year-old-chhindwara-student-commits-suicide-after-getting-6-marks-omr-sheet-reveals-actual-score-2851765|title=NEET Results 2020: 18-year-old Chhindwara student commits suicide after getting 6 marks; OMR sheet reveals actual score|date=October 23, 2020|website=DNA India|access-date=October 26, 2020|archive-date=October 26, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201026211652/https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-neet-results-2020-18-year-old-chhindwara-student-commits-suicide-after-getting-6-marks-omr-sheet-reveals-actual-score-2851765|url-status=live}}</ref> Vidhi's response sheet proved that she had actually scored 590 marks.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.india.com/news/india/neet-results-mp-student-dies-by-suicide-after-getting-6-marks-omr-sheet-shows-590-4182933/|title=18-Year-Old Dies by Suicide After Scoring 6 Marks in NEET Results, OMR Sheet Reveals She Scored 590|date=October 23, 2020|website=India News, Breaking News, Entertainment News | India.com|access-date=October 26, 2020|archive-date=October 30, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201030011112/https://www.india.com/news/india/neet-results-mp-student-dies-by-suicide-after-getting-6-marks-omr-sheet-shows-590-4182933/|url-status=live}}</ref>

In the [[National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (Undergraduate)|NEET (UG)]] 2020 exam, the NTA had allegedly declared Mridul Rawat as failed.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/neet-2020-low-scorer-turns-to-be-topper-in-st-category-nta-comes-to-rescue/story-jPiSa5QRiobWgs6wFaAh9H.html|title=NEET 2020: Low scorer turns to be topper in ST category, NTA comes to rescue|date=October 20, 2020|website=Hindustan Times|access-date=October 20, 2020|archive-date=October 20, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201020114625/https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/neet-2020-low-scorer-turns-to-be-topper-in-st-category-nta-comes-to-rescue/story-jPiSa5QRiobWgs6wFaAh9H.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://zeenews.india.com/india/major-blunder-in-neet-2020-exam-results-revealed-all-india-topper-declared-as-failed-2318750.html|title=Major blunder in NEET 2020 exam results revealed, All India topper declared as failed|date=October 20, 2020|website=Zee News|access-date=October 20, 2020|archive-date=October 21, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201021061524/https://zeenews.india.com/india/major-blunder-in-neet-2020-exam-results-revealed-all-india-topper-declared-as-failed-2318750.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Rawat claimed that he challenged the NTA and after rechecking his [[Optical mark recognition|OMR]] sheet and Answer Key, it was found that he was an All India Topper ([[Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes|ST Category]]). Rawat also claimed that even after the rechecking, in the revised scorecard, his score was 650 but only three hundred twenty-nine were written in words.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-major-blunder-nta-declares-neet-2020-all-india-topper-as-failed-2851027|title=Major blunder! NTA declares NEET 2020 All India Topper as failed|date=October 20, 2020|website=DNA India|access-date=October 20, 2020|archive-date=October 21, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201021082152/https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-major-blunder-nta-declares-neet-2020-all-india-topper-as-failed-2851027|url-status=live}}</ref> The NTA refuted the claims of Mridul Rawat.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/delhi/2020/oct/21/nta-to-file-fir-for-fake-newsclaiming-incorrect-neet-result-2213086.html|title=NTA to file FIR for fake news claiming incorrect NEET result|website=The New Indian Express|date=21 October 2020|access-date=21 October 2020|archive-date=24 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201024083823/https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/delhi/2020/oct/21/nta-to-file-fir-for-fake-newsclaiming-incorrect-neet-result-2213086.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Director-General Vineet Joshi of the NTA said, “An aspirant has claimed that he has 650 marks whereas he has obtained 329 marks in the NEET 2020 results. The emails purported to have been written by the NTA are also fake. This news has been broadcast by some local news channels in some cities. It was totally fake, fabricated, and one-sided and news channels should have confirmed from NTA prior to broadcasting it. In the instant case, a complaint was being filed by the NTA with the cybersecurity cell under the IT Act at Noida, UP.”<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/neet-2020-low-scorer-turns-to-be-topper-in-st-category-nta-comes-to-rescue/story-jPiSa5QRiobWgs6wFaAh9H.html|title=NTA refutes NEET aspirant's claim of AIR 1 Rank in ST category|date=October 20, 2020|website=Hindustan Times|access-date=October 20, 2020|archive-date=October 20, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201020114625/https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/neet-2020-low-scorer-turns-to-be-topper-in-st-category-nta-comes-to-rescue/story-jPiSa5QRiobWgs6wFaAh9H.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

== JEE (Main) 2022 technical glitches ==
The National Testing Agency was widely criticised for the improper conduction of the JEE (Main) 2022 examination. Many students faced technical glitches during the examination, which resulted in lower scores.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Server glitch sparks chaos at JEE centre in Hyderabad |url=https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/telangana/2022/jun/25/server-glitch-sparks-chaos-at-jee-centre-in-hyderabad-2469489.html |access-date=2022-08-27 |website=The New Indian Express |date=24 June 2022 |archive-date=2022-08-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220827101045/https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/telangana/2022/jun/25/server-glitch-sparks-chaos-at-jee-centre-in-hyderabad-2469489.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Glitches in answer key and response sheet of the exam were also a serious problem for the students. The agency has not considered the re-conduction of the examination.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/news/story/technical-glitches-denied-the-candidates-a-fair-attempt-at-the-jee-main-2022-writes-karti-p-chidambaram-2305883-2022-12-06 | title='Technical glitches denied the candidates a fair attempt at the JEE Main 2022', writes Karti P Chidambaram | date=6 December 2022 | access-date=2024-02-14 | archive-date=2024-02-14 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240214045826/https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/news/story/technical-glitches-denied-the-candidates-a-fair-attempt-at-the-jee-main-2022-writes-karti-p-chidambaram-2305883-2022-12-06 | url-status=live }}</ref>

== Apparent misconduct and irregularity in JEE (Main) 2024 ==
The NTA has been criticised for irregularities in the difficulty level of question papers of JEE(Main), which leads to the normalisation of marks and ultimately, lower scores of candidates.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-02-13 |title=JEE Mains Result 2024: Students raise concerns over an alleged error in percentile calculation |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/jee-mains-result-2024-students-raise-concerns-over-alleged-error-in-percentile-calculation/articleshow/107657856.cms |access-date=2024-02-13 |work=The Times of India |issn=0971-8257 |archive-date=2024-02-13 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240213104021/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/jee-mains-result-2024-students-raise-concerns-over-alleged-error-in-percentile-calculation/articleshow/107657856.cms |url-status=live }}</ref>

===JEE (Main) 2024 Session 1 (January) ===
The discrepancy of appearing students in the initial four shifts of January 27(Shift 1 and 2) and January 29(Shift 1 and 2) has been reported by many students. The NTA allegedly distributed candidates erratically over the 10 shifts. Claims state that an absurdly larger appearance of students on the first two days was observed which caused major disparities in percentiles of the candidates. A surge in cutoff was also observed which further caused despair among some students. Multiple requests under the [[Right to Information Act, 2005|RTI Act]] have been filed, seeking evidence-backed statistical records of the number of students appearing in the respective shifts.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://news.careers360.com/jee-main-2024-results-out-jeemain-ntaonline-in-error-percentile-calculation-calls-it-nta-blunder | title=JEE Main 2024 results at jeemain.ntaonline.in; students claim error in percentile calculation | date=13 February 2024 | access-date=13 February 2024 | archive-date=13 February 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240213164357/https://news.careers360.com/jee-main-2024-results-out-jeemain-ntaonline-in-error-percentile-calculation-calls-it-nta-blunder | url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref>{{cite news | url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/jee-mains-result-2024-students-raise-concerns-over-alleged-error-in-percentile-calculation/articleshow/107657856.cms | title=JEE Mains Result 2024: Students raise concerns over alleged error in percentile calculation | newspaper=The Times of India | date=13 February 2024 | access-date=13 February 2024 | archive-date=13 February 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240213164831/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/jee-mains-result-2024-students-raise-concerns-over-alleged-error-in-percentile-calculation/articleshow/107657856.cms | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://indianexpress.com/article/education/jee-main-2024-result-students-allege-error-in-percentile-calculation-nta-dismisses-claims-9158572/#:~:text=However%2C%20some%20students%20are%20claiming,Main%20marks%20and%20percentile%20predictions.&text=Aaryan%20Agarwal%2C%20a%20student%20from,99.088%20percentile%20at%20the%20end | title=JEE Main 2024 Result: Students allege error in percentile calculation, NTA dismisses claims | date=13 February 2024 | access-date=14 February 2024 | archive-date=14 February 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240214045630/https://indianexpress.com/article/education/jee-main-2024-result-students-allege-error-in-percentile-calculation-nta-dismisses-claims-9158572/#:~:text=However%2C%20some%20students%20are%20claiming,Main%20marks%20and%20percentile%20predictions.&text=Aaryan%20Agarwal%2C%20a%20student%20from,99.088%20percentile%20at%20the%20end | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.freepressjournal.in/education/jee-main-2024-results-students-express-concerns-over-alleged-errors-in-percentile-calculation | title=JEE Main 2024 Results: Students Express Concerns over Alleged Errors in Percentile Calculation | access-date=2024-02-14 | archive-date=2024-02-14 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240214045630/https://www.freepressjournal.in/education/jee-main-2024-results-students-express-concerns-over-alleged-errors-in-percentile-calculation | url-status=live }}</ref>
<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.news18.com/education-career/jee-main-2024-session-1-result-students-allege-error-in-percentile-calculation-by-nta-8778357.html | title=JEE Main 2024 Session 1 Result: Students Allege 'Error' in Percentile Calculation by NTA | date=15 February 2024 | access-date=2024-02-15 | archive-date=2024-02-15 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240215080845/https://www.news18.com/education-career/jee-main-2024-session-1-result-students-allege-error-in-percentile-calculation-by-nta-8778357.html | url-status=live }}</ref> However, the NTA released the data in which no uneven distribution of candidates was found.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-02-16 |title=NTA: No uneven distribution of candidates within shifts in JEE (Main) |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/nta-no-uneven-distribution-of-candidates-within-shifts-in-jee-main/articleshow/107759502.cms |access-date=2024-03-02 |work=The Times of India |issn=0971-8257 |archive-date=2024-03-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240302212505/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/nta-no-uneven-distribution-of-candidates-within-shifts-in-jee-main/articleshow/107759502.cms |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== JEE (Main) 2024 Session 2 (April) ===
The agency stated that one case of impersonation and nine cases of cheating or other unfair means were reported on 4 April. It was later reported that the impersonation case was reported in [[Noida]], while the other nine cases were reported in various parts of the country. The offenders were detected through artificial intelligence enabled monitoring and biometric verification.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-04-05 |title=AI helps catch impersonator on Day 1 of JEE (M) |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/ai-helps-catch-impersonator-on-day-1-of-jee-m/articleshow/109051815.cms |access-date=2024-04-16 |work=The Times of India |issn=0971-8257 |archive-date=2024-04-16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240416020434/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/ai-helps-catch-impersonator-on-day-1-of-jee-m/articleshow/109051815.cms |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-04-04 |title=Press Release : Case of impersonation using unfair means caught during the conduct of the JEE Main 2024 Session 2 Examination |url=https://jeemain.nta.ac.in/images/PressRelease05_04_2024.pdf |access-date=2024-04-16 |website=National Testing Agency |archive-date=2024-04-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240406051602/https://jeemain.nta.ac.in/images/PressRelease05_04_2024.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> In its concluding press release, the agency highlighted that 39 candidates have been disqualified for a period of three years due to their involvement in unfair practices during the examination.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-04-24 |title=Press Release|url=https://jeemain.nta.ac.in/images/press-release-for-the-release-of-rank-and-nta-scores-for-jee-main-2024-session-2-dated-24-april-2024.pdf |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=National Testing Agency}}</ref>

== 2024 NEET-UG controversy ==
{{main|2024 NEET controversy}}
In [[National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (Undergraduate)|NEET (UG)]] 2024 exam, for which a little more than 24 lakh registered, the paper was leaked on 5 May 2024 in [[Patna]], [[Bihar]]. According to the police, the paper leak mafia allegedly took ₹30 lakhs to ₹50 lakhs from many candidates and accommodated them in the lodges of Patna where they were provided question papers, claiming to be that of NEET-UG, for memorizing.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kumar |first=Avinash |date=11 May 2024 |title=NEET UG 2024 paper leak case: Economic Offences Unit of Bihar Police springs into action, new revelations come to fore |url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/news/neet-ug-2024-paper-leak-case-economic-offences-unit-of-bihar-police-springs-into-action-new-revelations-come-to-fore-101715431832762.html |website=Hindustan Times}}</ref>

On 4 June 2024, the NEET-UG result was suddenly declared on the same day as the result of the [[2024 Indian general election]], 10 days before the expected result date, declared by the NTA. Publicly published results of various all-India top scorers who scored 718 and 719 marks went viral on the Internet. Many students and teachers pointed out that due to the structure of the marking scheme, it was impossible to obtain those marks in the NEET-UG examinations.

The number of candidates scoring full marks also went up from 2 in 2023 to 67 in 2024 From a merit list uploaded into the public database by the NTA, it was also revealed that of those 67, scoring 720 out of 720 marks, six took the exam from the same or nearby centres in the [[Jhajjar]] city of [[Haryana]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=8 NEET UG Toppers From Same Centre In Jhajjar, Haryana Raises Doubts; Reports Suggest Were Given 'Two Exam Papers' |url=https://www.freepressjournal.in/education/8-neet-ug-toppers-from-same-centre-in-jhajjar-haryana-raises-doubts-reports-suggest-were-given-two-exam-papers |access-date=2024-06-08 |website=Free Press Journal |language=en}}</ref>

When students raised their concerns, the NTA released a statement to explain the discrepancies: "(The) NTA received few representations and Court Cases from the candidates of (the) NEET (UG) 2024, raising concerns of loss of time during the conduct of the examination on 5 May 2024. Such cases/representations were considered by (the) NTA and the normalisation formula, which has been devised and adopted by the Hon'ble Apex Court, vide its judgment dated 13th June 2018, was implemented to address the loss of time faced by the candidates of (the) NEET (UG) 2024."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kumar |first=Rahul |date=5 June 2024 |title=NEET UG 2024 Results: NTA Awards Grace Marks For Exam Time Loss, Clarifies 718, 719 Scores |url=https://www.ndtv.com/education/neet-ug-2024-results-nta-awards-grace-marks-for-exam-time-loss-clarifies-718-719-scores-5821572 |website=NDTV}}</ref>

The NTA noted that around 1,563 candidates were given grace marks, and the revised marks of such candidates vary from 20 to 720 marks. Students raised concerns over not being notified of the grace mark formulation in the examination brochures and the criteria for allotment of these grace marks.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Upadhyay |first=Deepak |date=7 June 2024 |title=NEET Exam Row: Students demand transparency after inflated marks charges, HC hearing {{!}} Top 11 updates |url=https://www.livemint.com/education/news/neet-ug-2024-nta-s-grace-marks-to-1563-candidates-triggers-row-examinees-opposition-protest-all-you-need-to-know-11717755414085.html |work=LiveMint}}</ref> However, after the intervention of the Supreme Court, the NTA decided to withdraw the grace marks and hold the examination again for those 1,563 candidates on 23 June 2024. Out of these, 813 students took the retest.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-06-24 |title=NEET-UG retest: 750 of 1,563 candidates awarded grace marks skip retest |url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/services/education/neet-ug-retest-750-of-1563-candidates-awarded-grace-marks-skip-retest/articleshow/111209566.cms?from=mdr |access-date=2024-07-23 |work=The Economic Times |issn=0013-0389}}</ref>

The National Testing Agency (NTA), entrusted with organizing NEET (UG) 2024, has taken significant steps to address such challenges. These measures include deploying advanced security technologies, increasing CCTV coverage, and enforcing stricter protocols for invigilators to ensure a fair and transparent examination environment.

As per the recommendations of the High Powered Committee, NTA decided to reconduct the NEET (UG) 2024 on 23 June 2024 for 1563 candidates who had experienced time loss during the originally scheduled examination on 5 May 2024 and were awarded compensatory marks.<ref>{{Cite web |title=NTA |url=https://exams.nta.ac.in/NEET/images/public-notice-for-neet-ug-2024-retest-for-affected-candidates12062024.pdf}}</ref>

On July 23, 2024, the [[Supreme Court of India]] led by [[Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud|Justice DY Chandrachud]] and consisting of Justices [[J. B. Pardiwala|JB Pardiwala]] and [[Manoj Misra]] acknowledged that at least 155 students directly benefitted from the paper leak ruled that there were no indications of an overall systemic failure barring few circumstances and denied that there was any large-scale leak of the NEET(UG) 2024 paper hence ruled that there would be no re-examination as there were no credible reports of a large-scale phenomenon.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Roy |first=Debayan |date=2024-07-23 |title=NEET UG 2024: Supreme Court rejects plea for re-examination |url=https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/neet-ug-2024-supreme-court-rejects-plea-reexamination |access-date=2024-07-23 |website=Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-07-23 |title=NEET UG 2024 SC hearing LIVE Updates: SC refuses to cancel exam, says there is no material to show systemic breach |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/neet-ug-hearing-2024-live-updates-july-23/article68435264.ece |access-date=2024-07-23 |work=The Hindu |language=en-IN |issn=0971-751X}}</ref>

== Controversy in the final results of JEE (Main) 2025 ==
Following the release of the JEE Main 2025 Session 2 results by the National Testing Agency (NTA), concerns were raised by students and educators regarding discrepancies in the NTA percentile scores. Several students reported a mismatch between their raw scores and the percentiles allotted, with instances where candidates with lower scores received higher percentiles, while those with higher raw scores were awarded comparatively lower percentiles.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Solanki |first=Saumya |date=2025-04-19 |title=JEE Main 2025 results: Students and educators allege widespread irregularities |url=https://www.edexlive.com/news/2025/Apr/19/jee-main-2025-results-students-and-educators-allege-widespread-irregularities |access-date=2025-04-21 |website=EdexLive |language=en}}</ref>

This anomaly sparked confusion and dissatisfaction, particularly among students who narrowly missed the eligibility cutoff for [[JEE Advanced]] 2025 due to their reported percentiles. Many candidates took to social media platforms to share their experiences, and the issue gained wider attention after it was first highlighted by a YouTuber in his video and in the comments section, who analyzed and compared scorecards submitted by affected students.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Solanki |first=Saumya |date=2025-04-19 |title=JEE Main 2025 results: Students and educators allege widespread irregularities |url=https://www.edexlive.com/news/2025/Apr/19/jee-main-2025-results-students-and-educators-allege-widespread-irregularities |access-date=2025-04-21 |website=EdexLive |language=en}}</ref>

As the issue gained traction, demands for clarification from the "NTA" increased, with some students urging a review or reevaluation of the percentile normalization process used for multi-shift exams. At the time, the NTA had not issued a formal statement addressing the specific mismatches reported in Session 2.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Solanki |first=Saumya |date=2025-04-19 |title=JEE Main 2025 results: Students and educators allege widespread irregularities |url=https://www.edexlive.com/news/2025/Apr/19/jee-main-2025-results-students-and-educators-allege-widespread-irregularities |access-date=2025-04-21 |website=EdexLive |language=en}}</ref>

==Confusion over calculator use in the Information Bulletin of JEE (Main) 2026==


In the first version of the Information Bulletin (uploaded on 31 October 2025) for the Joint Entrance Examination (Main) 2026, the National Testing Agency (NTA) mentioned that an onscreen standard calculator would be available during the computer-based test. On 2 November, the NTA issued a clarification stating that the mention of the calculator was a typographic error and that no calculator, either onscreen or physical, will be allowed in the examination. The corrected version of the Information Bulletin was later uploaded on the official website for candidates to download.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-11-03 |title=No calculator use in JEE Main 2026, typographic error in earlier bulletin: NTA |url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/no-calculator-use-in-jee-main-2026-typographic-error-in-earlier-bulletin-nta-101762116714410.html |access-date=2025-11-03 |website=Hindustan Times |language=en}}</ref>

Many aspirants and coaching institutes remarked that the inclusion of a calculator in the original bulletin would have significantly impacted preparation strategies for the high-numerical-weight sections of the exam. After the retraction, several institutes urged students to revert to strong manual calculation skills and practice without expecting electronic aids. The sudden change triggered widespread discussion on social media and exam-prep platforms until the corrected bulletin was uploaded.<ref>{{cite web | title = How Virtual Calculator Impacts the Preparation of JEE Mains 2026 | website = Careers360 | date = 1 Nov 2025 | url = https://engineering.careers360.com/articles/how-virtual-calculator-impacts-the-preparation-of-jee-mains | access-date = 3 Nov 2025 }}</ref>

==See also==
* [[National Testing Agency]]
* [[NCERT textbook controversies]]
* [[2024 NEET controversy]]
*[[Education in India]]
*[[Ministry of Education (India)]]

== References ==

{{reflist}}

[[Category:Controversies in India]]
[[Category:Scandals in India]]
[[Category:Academic scandals]]
[[Category:Education scandals]]
[[Category:Education fraud]]
[[Category:Fraud in India]]
[[Category:Political controversies in India]]
[[Category:Political scandals in India]]
[[Category:Education controversies in India]]
[[Category:Political corruption in India]]
[[Category:Corruption in India]]

National Testing Agency controversies - Revision history

SimonK54990761: Info