New Delhi | July 23, 2025
The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to stay the ongoing NEET UG 2025 counselling process, even as it agreed to hear petitions from a group of students who have sought a re-examination citing severe power outages at exam centres in Madhya Pradesh.
The petitioners several NEET aspirants from Indore and Ujjain alleged that prolonged electricity cuts during the exam on May 5 led to unfair testing conditions and demanded a re-test or alternate remedy.
What Happened in MP?
At the heart of the controversy are reports of uninterrupted power failures in select NEET UG centres in Madhya Pradesh, where some candidates were allegedly forced to attempt the exam under torchlight and candles, with many losing valuable time during critical sections of the test.
Petitioners argue that such circumstances violated their right to equal opportunity under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Supreme Court’s Stand: Counselling Will Continue
A bench led by Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice A.S. Chandurkar heard the matter today and made it clear that the overall counselling process for NEET UG — which involves over 22 lakh candidates — will not be halted due to complaints from a small group.
“We cannot bring the entire process to a standstill… Let counselling continue,” Justice Narasimha remarked.
At the same time, the Court acknowledged that grievances of the affected students deserved attention and listed the matter for detailed hearing on Friday, July 25.
• A fresh examination for students who experienced disruption
• Alternatively, permission to provisionally participate in counselling pending final orders
• Scrutiny of National Testing Agency’s (NTA) exam preparedness and response mechanisms
NTA and Govt’s Argument
The National Testing Agency and Union Government have opposed the re-test demand, arguing:
• That only a very limited number of students were impacted
• There were adequate lighting arrangements in most centres
• Re-examination would disrupt the academic calendar and delay admissions for lakhs
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta emphasized that allowing such relief in isolated instances could open the floodgates for litigation every exam cycle.
Legal Implication
The case tests the tension between fairness to a few and efficiency for all. While the Supreme Court has rightly avoided a blanket disruption of counselling, it remains to be seen whether targeted relief such as grace marks, provisional admissions, or future seat allocation protections may be granted.
The final outcome could set a precedent for how infrastructural failures are treated in national competitive exams.
Student Voices
Many aspirants from MP continue to share their experiences on social media, calling for justice.
“I studied two years for this. Lost 30 minutes in darkness. At least let me compete fairly,” tweeted one petitioner from Ujjain.
