Madras High Court: In an intra-court appeal filed by medical aspirants against the order dated 06-06-2025, wherein their plea for a re-examination of NEET UG 2025 due to power outage was dismissed, the Division Bench of Nisha Banu and M. Jothiraman*, JJ. held that the Court could not exercise appellate jurisdiction over the National Testing Agency’s (‘NTA’) considered decision, which was based on field-level verification and expert statistical analysis, unless it was shown to be manifestly arbitrary, mala fide, or illegal. As no such grounds were established, the Court found no reason to interfere with the impugned order, and accordingly, the writ appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.
Background
Medical aspirants have filed five writ petitions seeking common relief. The primary ground raised in the writ petitions was that a power outage occurred during the NEET (UG) 2025 examination in 4 centres. The appellants had filed petitions seeking direction to the NTA, to consider their representation and conduct a re-examination for them and other similarly affected candidates.
The Writ Court, by an impugned common order, dismissed all five writ petitions. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants preferred the present appeal.
Analysis and Decision
The Court noted that, vide order dated 10-06-2025, it had directed NTA, to produce the CCTV footage of the examination hall in question. In compliance with the said order, the NTA submitted a report along with screenshots of the CCTV footage from various classrooms at the centre, relating to the NEET (UG) 2025 examination.
The Court noted that, as per the speaking order dated 01-06-2025 issued by NTA, although there was a brief power outage, natural light was sufficient, and the examination activities continued without interruption. Additionally, the centre had arranged for power backup, ensuring that the conduct of the examination was not adversely affected.
Further, the Court noted that according to the subsequent report dated 15-06-2025, along with the accompanying CCTV screenshots, the footage covered multiple rooms, including the one where the appellants were seated. The recording began at 2:00 p.m. and continued uninterrupted until approximately 3:09 p.m. Thereafter, due to a regional power outage caused by localized storms, the recording ceased, as the CCTV system, managed by a private vendor was not connected to the diesel generator (‘DG’) supply grid. The report further stated that the examination centre was equipped with a dedicated DG supply, which was activated immediately following the power outage. Power restoration, particularly lighting in the examination rooms across all floors, was prioritized and completed within a few minutes.
The Court noted that the integrity of the examination was primarily ensured through human supervision, which included the presence of the Centre Superintendent, Invigilators, NTA-appointed Observers, and the City Coordinator. All these officials had examined the situation and confirmed that the examination was conducted smoothly. The NTA had also conducted a factual enquiry, which involved field verification based on reports submitted by the examination functionaries, along with an independent statistical analysis of candidate performance data. This analysis was conducted by an expert committee independent of the NTA, using anonymized data. It compared the average number of questions attempted by candidates at the affected centre with those at other centres in Thiruvallur District. The analysis revealed no statistically significant difference, confirming that the alleged power outage did not materially impact candidate performance.
The Court emphasised that NEET (UG) 2025 is a time-sensitive, large-scale national examination, and that re-examination in such a context could severely impact more than two million candidates.
The Court viewed that it cannot sit in appellate jurisdiction over the NTA’s considered decision, which was based on field-level verification and expert statistical analysis, unless it was shown to be manifestly arbitrary, mala fide, or illegal. As no such grounds were made out, the Court found no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Consequently, the writ appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
[S. Sai Priya v. Union of India, 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 3120, decided on 03-07-2025]
*Order by: Justice M.Jothiraman
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Appellant(s) :Mr.T. Saikrishnan
For Respondent(s):Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr.M.Sathyan, Central Government Standing Counsel, Mrs.Sunitha Kumar Standing Counsel for NTA, Ms.Subharanjani Anand
