Delhi HC Directs NTA to Improve NEET UG Biometric Process

The Delhi High Court has directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to improve the biometric verification process during the NEET UG exam for future candidates. A division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Sachin Datta also upheld an earlier order that asked NTA to set up a Standing Grievance Redressal Committee. This committee will help resolve issues faced by candidates due to technical problems, especially when they are not at fault.

However, the Court dismissed the plea of some NEET UG 2025 candidates who had requested grace marks due to time lost during biometric verification at the exam center. These candidates claimed the delay was caused by exam staff and not by them.

The Court agreed with NTA's argument that the biometric issues were caused by the actions of the candidates themselves, not by the agency. It also said that giving grace marks in such situations could lead to unfair advantages and open the door to many similar claims from others who faced minor delays.

The judges emphasized that biometric checks are a key part of the exam's security to prevent impersonation. Awarding marks for delays in this process, especially when NTA is not at fault, is not justified.

Additionally, the Court rejected the idea of creating a "supernumerary rank" (an extra rank) for affected candidates. It said this would disturb the fairness of the ranking system and affect other students' chances during the counseling and seat allocation process.

 

FAQs on the Delhi High Court’s recent order regarding NEET UG 2025 and NTA:

1. What did the Delhi High Court say about the NEET UG biometric verification process?

The Delhi High Court directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to streamline and improve the biometric verification process for NEET UG to avoid delays and ensure a smooth exam experience for candidates.

2. Will affected students receive grace marks for delays during biometric verification?

No, the Court rejected the request for grace marks from students who faced delays due to biometric issues. It ruled that such delays, if caused by the candidates themselves, do not justify awarding extra marks.

3. What is the Standing Grievance Redressal Committee mentioned in the ruling?

The Court upheld the earlier order asking NTA to set up a Standing Grievance Redressal Committee. This committee will handle complaints from candidates who face issues like technical delays during exams without any fault of their own.

4. Why did the Court reject the idea of creating a ‘supernumerary rank’?

The Court stated that adding an extra or “supernumerary” rank for affected candidates would disturb the strict merit-based ranking system of NEET UG and impact the seat allocation process, making it unfair for other candidates.

5. What was NTA’s argument in this case, and how did the Court respond?

NTA argued that the biometric delays were due to the candidates' own conduct and not the agency’s fault. The Court agreed, warning that giving grace marks in such cases could lead to widespread claims and compromise the fairness of the exam system.