Having come to the aid of a disabled student with dysgraphia who was not given an extra hour of compensatory time on the NEET (UG) exam and her answer sheet was forcibly taken away, the Supreme Court on Tuesday petitioned the National Testing Agency (NTA) to consider accepting measures to remedy the injustice inflicted on her within one week.
Dysgraphia causes handwriting abnormalities and exhibits inconsistent handwriting, misspellings and incorrect spacing, transcription difficulties, and inconsistencies.
The higher court stated that individual injustices arising from the wrongful denial of rights and rights under the law cannot be consigned to oblivion on the grounds that they are a necessary consequence of a competitive examination.
The panel of judges D. Ya. Chandrahuda and A. S. Bopanna, however, refused to provide assistance to a student diagnosed with 40 percent permanent disability to take the NEET (UG) re-examination.
The applicant was unduly deprived of her compensation time for one hour while attending NEET without any fault of her own, despite her rights as a disabled person (PwD) and a person with a control disability (PwBD). Accordingly, the first respondent (NTA) should consider what steps can be taken to correct the injustice within one week. In addition, he must take the necessary follow-up action at the direction of DGHS, ”- said in the message.
It states that the steps taken by the NTA as directed by the court must be brought to the attention of the Registry of that court by filing a status report within two weeks.
Judge Chandrachud, who drew up the verdict, said: “For a government bound by the dictates of the law and the Constitution, it is not an answer to throw up their hands in despair instead of trying to correct the injustice inflicted on the student. The judge cannot ignore the fact that there is a human face behind the statistics, reflecting the aspirations, joy and tears of the student and her family. ”
The bench noted that the student held the All India title of 1,721 out of 2,684 candidates qualified in the PwD category, while in Maharashtra she was ranked 249 out of 390 candidates in the PwD category.
The NTA stated that about 15.4 lakh candidates appeared on NEET (UG) 2021 on September 12, 2021, the result was announced on November 1, 2021, and the All India ranking was submitted on November 9, 2021. consultations upon admission.
The court stated that the NTA, as an examining body, was obliged to scrupulously enforce the Guidelines for Written Examinations, which provide for certain mitigations.
“The plaintiff suffered injustice due to the wrongful denial of these concessions, and the lack of remedy from this court will lead to irrevocable injustice to the student’s life. The 2016 Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (RwPD), which prescribes preferential provisions for persons with certain disabilities, will not make sense if it is not strictly enforced, ”it said.
It added: “In our opinion, the first respondent (NTA) should not be allowed to simply walk away when faced with a situation where a student has been injured for being behind a large competitive exam situation.”
The court took note of the NTA’s arguments that with such a large exam, when more than 16 thousand students registered and more than 15 thousand students appeared, it was impossible to correct the injustice that was inflicted on one candidate.
“The first respondent (NTA) must remember that all authorities have a responsibility under the law and, above all, a sense of accountability. The first defendant is guided by the rule of law and the constitutional requirement of fairness. Behind the abstract number of 15,000 students are human lives that can be changed due to unintentional but serious mistakes of the first respondent, ”the message says.
The panel of judges said that in this case, the student applied for a re-examination, where she would be given compensation time in accordance with the Written Exam Guidelines and NEET Bulletin 2021.
“We agree with the opinion that holding a new exam is impractical and impractical. Doing a new test will delay hospitalization and cause uncertainty and chaos. In this regard, the refusal of judicial protection required for the re-examination of the appellant is not violated, ”the message says.
The panel stated: “This court will not dictate how the complaint should be resolved, leaving it to the discretion of the testing agency, which has overall responsibility for conducting the examination. In this case, we are of the categorical opinion that the first respondent cannot evade its duty to correct the injustice caused to the plaintiff. ”
The bench spoke about the effective participation of students with disabilities in the life of society, which is undoubtedly a beneficial object of legislation, the guarantees provided by the law must be duly observed, and any violation of rights must be prosecuted.
“Responsibility and power without accountability is a curse on our Constitution,” the statement said, adding that the number of cases where such injustice occurs may be several or more, but the fact cannot be ignored that for a student who is forced to suffer, The consequences are really serious.