The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a plea challenging the postponement of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for Super Speciality (NEET-SS) 2024. The petition, filed by a group of 13 doctors, sought the court’s intervention to conduct the NEET-SS 2024 examination as originally scheduled, in July-August 2024.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud ruled that the decision taken by the National Medical Commission (NMC) to postpone the examination was not arbitrary and, therefore, could not be overturned. However, the bench urged the NMC to make a timely decision on rescheduling the NEET-SS 2024 exam to provide clarity and certainty for the candidates.
The petitioners, represented by advocate Rashmi Nandakumar, argued that the indefinite postponement of the exam was arbitrary, irrational, and had caused significant distress among candidates. They contended that the postponement disrupted their career plans and academic schedules, as many had prepared for the exam by quitting jobs and foregoing new assignments.
The NMC’s decision to delay the exam was attributed to the scheduling disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the NMC, the MD/MS and DNB courses for the 2021 batch were delayed and concluded between January and May 2022, rendering NEET-PG 2021 candidates ineligible to sit for the NEET-SS exam in 2024. The petitioners argued that this justification was inadequate and disrupted the academic calendar, which is critical for maintaining a predictable and transparent admission process.
The petitioners further highlighted that the Supreme Court had previously approved a schedule for completing admissions to Super Speciality courses, which stipulated that the NEET-SS examination should be held by July 10 each year, with the entire process completed by August 31. The NMC’s decision to postpone the 2024 examination, they argued, violated this schedule and the legitimate expectations of candidates.
The petition also raised concerns about the broader implications of the postponement, including its impact on patient care and the disruption of academic schedules. The petitioners urged the court to ensure that such disruptions do not become a recurring issue, leading to ongoing anomalies in the admission process.
(ANI)
