High Court Refuses Petition for Biannual NEET-UG, Emphasizes Policy Decision

Delhi HC Rules Against Multiple Shifts for NEET-UG, Leaves Decision to Authorities

In a recent development, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain a plea requesting that the National Eligibility-Entrance Test Undergraduate (NEET-UG) examination be conducted twice a year in multiple shifts. The court emphasized that such decisions fall within the administrative domain and are beyond judicial intervention. The petitioner had urged that NEET-UG be held in a format similar to the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) Mains. However, the court dismissed the plea, underscoring that it is a policy matter for the relevant authorities to address.

Meanwhile, the NTA has announced that the NEET UG 2025 exam will be held on May 4. In 2024, over 24 lakh candidates appeared for the exam, competing for 1,08,000 MBBS seats, with about 56,000 available in government hospitals and 52,000 in private colleges. NEET results are also used for admissions to Dentistry, Ayurveda, Unani, and Siddha courses, and the exam will remain in pen-and-paper mode. The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, granted the petitioner, a teacher at a coaching centre, the liberty to approach the relevant authorities with representation. The court noted that any application or representation made should be considered by the authorities, who should take an appropriate decision under the law.

The petitioner argued that NEET-UG candidates should have multiple chances, similar to JEE Mains, to reduce psychological pressure and improve scores. However, the bench observed that other competitive exams also do not offer multiple opportunities. The court's decision highlights changes to the NEET-UG examination schedule are policy decisions that should be addressed by the appropriate authorities.

Editor's Note:

The Delhi High Court's decision to dismiss the plea for conducting the NEET-UG examination twice a year in multiple shifts underscores the importance of respecting the administrative domain of examination policies.  While the intention behind the plea was to reduce psychological pressure on students and improve their chances, the court rightly pointed out that such policy decisions are best left to the relevant authorities. Stakeholders must engage with policymakers to address concerns and explore potential improvements in the examination system.

Skoobuzz believes that this ruling serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between judicial intervention and administrative discretion in shaping educational frameworks.