SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 2029

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR
SAMEER JAIN, J.
Roshan Yadav D/o Shri Ramji Lal Yadav - Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through the Secretary, New Delhi - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8095 of 2025
Decided On : 07-07-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Gajendra Singh Rathore, Navdeep Singh, Paramanand Paliwal, Himanshu Jain, Divyanshu Choudhary, Apoorva Agarwal, Pradeep Kalwania, Sushila Kalwania, Majhar Hussain, Raghu Nandan Sharma, Vivek Joshi, Preeti Sharma, Om Prakash Sharma, Arpan Kumar Sharma, Santosh Kumar Soni, Tanveer Ahamad, Anurag Mathur, Akhilesh Kumar Saini, Virendra Godara, Anshuman Saxena, Vishal Gurjar, Lovesh Mamnani, Gaurav Meena, Narsi Prasad Sharma, Subhash Sharma, Vikas Jakhar, Vishal Roy, Savita Nathawat, Rajendra Kumar Pareek, O.P. Solanki
For the Respondents: Rupesh Kumar, M.S. Raghav, Viswas Saini, Mananjay Singh Rathore, Kirti Rathore, Rakesh Choudhary, Siddhant Jain, Pradhuman Singh Rathore, Pawan Pareek, Surya Pratap Rajawat, Sumit Sharma, G.S. Gill, Angad Mirdha

The examination authority is not liable for minor grievances raised by a negligible number of candidates, especially in force majeure situations, as these do not impact the overall integrity of a nationwide exam.

Headnote:(A) National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (UG) 2025 - Examination conducted under inefficient conditions - Allegations of power failures and jumbled question booklets raised - Petitioners sought re-examination or compensatory marks. (Paras 1-2)

(B) Legal principles - Duty of examination authority to ensure a fair testing environment; claims of candidates at affected centres viewed through a lens of statistical insignificance. (Paras 5-6)

(C) Dismissal of petitions - Mere minor grievances from a small cohort cannot disrupt a nationwide examination; lack of material prejudice established by statistical analysis. (Paras 16-24)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners claimed disruptions in NEET-UG due to power outages and jumbled questions at specific centres, affecting their exam performance, prompting requests for re-examination or bonus marks.

Findings of Court:
The court found no systematic prejudice or substantial grounds for redress, determining that disruptions were due to force majeure events.

Issues: The main issues were the impact of power outages on exam performance and the legitimacy of claims for compensatory measures.

Ratio Decidendi: The court opined that the minor grievances from a few candidates could not warrant the re-examination or compensatory awards detrimental to the majority's interest.

Result: Petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. scope of the controversy in neet-ug examination. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments from petitioners regarding examination irregularities and need for remedy. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. arguments from respondents contesting claims of petitioners. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
4. court observations on examination conduct and candidate performance. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
5. final decision on the dismissal of petitions. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)

JUDGMENT :

SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. In the present batch of writ petitions, the scope of the controversy involved, albeit not limited to but is broadly and predominantly defined by the challenge raised regarding the NEET-UG Exam, 2025 conducted on all India basis by the respondent – National Testing Agency (NTA) on 04.05.2025 wherein, due to power failure/outrage, adverse weather conditions of storm and rain; jumbled and non-sequential question booklet; irregular/delayed time shown by the wall clock in the examination rooms and failure to ensure fairness, transparency and equal opportunity during the said examination. Consequently, considering the fact that the writ petitions warrant adjudication on common questions of law and fact; with the consent of learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the parties, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8095/2025 titled as Roshan Yadav vs. Union of India and Ors. /b>. is being taken up as the lead case. It is cautiously clarified that any discrepancies in the present batch of writ petitions, pertain purely to the factual narratives contained therein and not vis-a-vis the questions of law to be determined by this Court; the instant judgment shall be applicable on all the petitions connected herein/henceforth on mutatis mutandis basis.

2. The lead petition is filed with the following prayers:

“a. By issuing a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, the Respondents be directed to consider the grievance of the Petitioner regarding the irregularities faced during the NEET (UG) examination and take appropriate remedial action including to conduct re-examination of NEET-2025 to the extent of Petitioner or grant bonus/compensatory marks; and/or, thereby if she is found successful then she may be allowed to participate in further process of counselling & admission in appropriate medical courses in any appropriate medical institution;

b. Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court considers just, fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the Petitioner;

c. By appropriate writ order or direction, the cost of litigation may also kingly be given to the petitioner .

d. By an appropriate writ order or direction any other appropriate relief to which the petitioner is found entitled to may also kindly be granter in her favour.”

FACTUAL BACKDROP :

3. On 04th May, 2025, the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (Undergraduate) was conducted across 5,468 centres situated in 552 cities within India as well as in 14 international cities. In the present batch of writ petitions, the cause of action is stated to have arisen at Sikar, Rajasthan, wherein 98 centres were designated as examination venues. A total of 32,208 candidates were registered at these centres, out of which 31,787 candidates appeared for the examination. It was averred by the counsel representing the petitioners that approximately 15 centres were adversely impacted due to power failure, and other alleged deficiencies, affecting 5,390 candidates who had appeared therein. From amongst the candidates at the aforesaid centres, 31 candidates have approached this Court by way of the present petitions, seeking directions either for conducting a re- examination or, in the alternative, the grant of compensatory/bonus marks.

SUBMISSIONS BY THE COUNSEL REPRESENTING THE PETITIONERS:

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners have unanimously submitted that, on account of the power failure and outage

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top