SC refuses to entertain PIL against cancellation of UGC-NET exam over paper leak

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the government's decision to cancel the UGC-NET examination due to alleged question paper leak.

A bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, alongside justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, dismissed a PIL that challenged the Union education ministry and the National Testing Agency's decision to cancel the UGC-NET exam. This decision followed allegations that the exam's integrity had been compromised. However, the court clarified that the dismissal does not reflect a judgment on the merits of the PIL as it was filed by a lawyer, Ujjawal Gaur, and not by the directly affected students.

"Why are you (lawyer) coming? Let the students come here themselves," Chief Justice Chandrachud remarked to the lawyer. "While declining the above PIL, we express nothing on merits."


The bench further advised advocate Ujjawal Gaur to concentrate on legal matters and allow aggrieved parties to address such issues. The plea, which aimed to halt the proposed re-examination of the UGC-NET exam until the CBI completed its investigation into the paper leak allegations, was ultimately dismissed.

The Union education ministry had ordered the cancellation of the UGC-NET exam on June 19, transferring the case to the CBI for an investigation into potential paper leaks.

"The petitioner asserts that the decision is not only arbitrary but also unjust, given the recent findings of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The CBI's investigation brings the fact that the evidence suggesting the paper leak is doctored, thus nullifying the grounds on which the cancellation was based," read the plea, filed through advocate Rohit Pandey.

Gaur contended that the cancellation was "unwarranted" and has caused substantial distress, anxiety, and unnecessary expenditures for aspirants who rigorously prepared for the critical examination. The court's decision has left the matter to be pursued by those directly impacted, should they choose to bring it forward themselves.

With inputs from ANI