Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Wajda Tabassum vs National Testing Agency on 30 November, 2021
Bench: D.Y. Chandrachud, A.S. Bopanna, Vikram Nath
1
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.4 SECTION X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).1260/2021
WAJDA TABASSUM & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY & ANR. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.149543/2021-EX-PARTE AD-INTERIM RELIEF)
Date : 30-11-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, AOR
Mr. Kumar Prashant, Adv.
Ms. Vanya Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Manish Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Avnish Dave, Adv.
Mr. Parmod Kumar Vishnoi, Adv.
Mr. Akash Pareek, Adv.
Ms. Himanshi Shakya, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG
Mr. Rupesh Kumar, AOR
Ms. Neelam Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Pankhuri Shrivastava, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1 The grievance of the petitioners relates to the solutions in the Hindi and English versions of Question No 2 of Section A in the Physics Paper (Code P2) of the NEET (UG) 2021 examination.
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by Sanjay Kumar Date: 2021.11.30 16:56:02 IST 2 Reason: Having regard to the submission that the answers to the same problem in the English and Hindi media would vary, based on the absence of the expression “amplitude of current” in the Hindi version, Mr Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, 2 had, on the previous occasion, assured the Court that the solution would be evaluated again by a Committee consisting of three experts. 3 The first respondent constituted a Committee of three Professors from IIT Guwahati, Delhi Technological University, Delhi and National Physical Laboratory, Delhi for evaluating the solutions in both the English and Hindi versions of Question No 2 of Section A in the Physics Paper of the NEET (UG) 2021 examination.
4 The conclusion of the evaluation has been set out in paragraph 9 of the affidavit which has been filed by the Joint Director of the first respondent and is extracted below:
“9. I submit that the Committee Members held a meeting on 27.11.2021 for the purpose of evaluation of solutions to Question No.2 of Section A in the Physics Paper of NEET (UG) 2021 both in Hindi and in English and concluded that the correct solution (answer) to said Question No.2 is 5Ω both in Hindi as well as English also the answer would be same i.e. 5Ω by providing the following explanation:
(a) In Question, the word “ धधरध“ should be understood as the amplitude of current which is also reflected from the circuit diagram as well as question statement, highlighting the alternating source.
(b) In Question, “धधरध“ word is mentioned, which certainly does not mean the “rms” value. Any confusion can be easily clarified from the given circuit diagram.”
5 Ms Archana Pathak Dave, Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has made an earnest endeavour to persuade this Court that based on the underlying material in the XIIth standard Board examination, there would be a variation in the solutions to the above problem in English and Hindi as a result of a difference in translation. 3 4 It would be beyond the remit of this Court to conduct an exercise of re-assessing the correctness of the solutions. The first respondent, which is the agency entrusted with the duty of conducting the NEET (UG) 2021 examination, while responding to the apprehensions of the students, had the matter scrutinized again by three subject experts. Hence, it would not be open to this Court to substitute its own view. In the circumstances, having given our anxious consideration to the submission which has been urged on behalf of the petitioners, we are unable to interfere. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
5 Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER