NEET-UG 24 | Supreme Court Rejects Plea For Retest By Candidate Suffering From Hyper Sweating Who Wasn't Allowed Handkerchief In Exam

The Supreme Court in a recent order dismissed a petition by NEET UG 2024 candidate suffering from condition of excessive sweating who sought a retest claiming that he was not allowed to carry his handkerchief into the exam hall. 

It was the case of the petitioner, who was represented by his father as petitioner in person, that he suffers from a condition causing excessive sweating of the palms and soles. The petitioner sought for a re-test at par with 1,563 other candidates who were allowed re-test for loss of time due to the delay in receiving the correct question paper. 

He claimed that the security personnel's prohibition to use a handkerchief during the exam greatly inconvenienced him. He stated that this led to difficulties in attempting questions and even caused him to mark a wrong answer on the OMR sheet.

The petitioner had first made a representation before the National Testing Agency which was rejected. Thereafter the Telangana High Court dismissed the petition on the grounds that the candidate was given the full allotted time for the exam, unlike 1,563 other candidates who were granted a re-examination due to delays in receiving the correct question paper.

The bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud comprising of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra upheld the decision of the High Court and observed the following : (1) The petitioner received the full allotted exam time, unlike the candidates who were granted a re-exam; (2) exam required darkening circles on an OMR sheet, which involves less writing than other exams. The court agreed with the High Court's view that wiping hands on clothes could have sufficed.

"In the examination, answers were to be rendered by darkening blank circles on the OMR sheet. In such a case, the use of a pen or a pencil is much less than where answers are to be written. Hence, the view taken by the High Court that denial of permission to take a handkerchief inside the examination hall would not have materially affected petitioner's performance, as he could have rubbed his palms on his clothes, is a plausible view." 

(3) the Court emphasized the need for caution in entertaining individual grievances about public exams, as it can delay results and affect the larger public interest. 

"Courts must be circumspect in entertaining an individual grievance relating to a Public Examination as it delays finalization of result thereby seriously prejudicing larger public interest."  

Case Details : TALLURI SRIKAR (MINOR) THROUGH HIS FATHER TALLURI SRIKRISHNA v. THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY & ORS. SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.20243/2024

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 696

Click here to read the judgment