PANJIM: Students Islamic Organisation of India (SIO) Goa Zone has demanded decentralizing medical and engineering entrance exams, in light of the NEET-UG and UGC-NET paper leaks and postponement of NEET-PG.
SIO is one of the petitioners that filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court of India against the discrepancies in NEET-UG and requested a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the National Testing Agency’s (NTA) conduct.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
Expressing concerns over discrepancies in the central examination process, SIO Goa’s president Usman Khan said that despite the introduction of paper leak laws, the integrity of the examination system has been compromised.
“The government’s mishandling of education has reached an alarming level in India. Rampant paper leaks, last-minute exam postponements, and a complete disregard for students’ well-being have turned education into a mockery. Students face immense mental stress, financial loss, and logistical nightmares due to the postponement of exams like NEET-PG and CSIR-NET a day before the scheduled date. This is also a clear example of the futility and danger of centralization in every sector, which this government is ardently pushing,” he stated.
Moreover, the recent incidents of paper leaks in Bihar and malpractices in Gujarat and Noida resulting in arrests have further eroded trust in the integrity of the examination, he said.
Khan also emphasized the severe impact on students’ mental health, exemplified by a recent tragic suicide.
He further said that SIO is deeply concerned about the NTA’s conduct and the series of events starting with the NTA notification. The abrupt reopening of the registration notification on April 9, even after a 15-day extension period, raised concerns about discrepancies, he pointed out.
He said in addition, the allocation of grace marks raises profound concerns regarding transparency and accountability.
While the NTA claimed to have awarded these marks for ‘loss of time’, they failed to document or transparently communicate the criteria and methodology for determining this ‘loss of time’, he pointed out.
