Delhi HC Seeks NTA Reply on NEET Biometric Plea
Share
New Delhi: Following a lawsuit brought by a candidate for the NEET UG 2025, the Delhi High Court has instructed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to respond to the charge that she was unjustly disqualified from taking the medical entrance examination because to a broken biometric verification system at her test location. The occasion has reignited debate on the techniques employed for identity verification and the way in which one of India’s most competitive entrance exams is given. Though she arrived at the NEET UG 2025 exam center well beforehand, the petitioner, a female candidate, filed an emergency writ petition alleging that she was barred from taking the exam due her biometric data was unverifiable there. Her plea claimed that the biometric system was defective and unable to capture her fingerprint, which caused the authorities to wrongfully classify her as “absent” despite her physical presence. Responding to the petition, the Delhi High Court has told the NTA to give a thorough explanation by a given time frame. Emphasizing the severity of the claims, the bench underlined the need for procedural fairness especially in national-level inspections where a single error could affect a student’s future in school and at employment. According to , the student produced her admission card and acceptable photo identification at the testing site after following all entry processes. Because of the biometric capture’s technical problems, though, she was told several times to wait and finally denied entrance at the start of the experiment. The candidate claims she had no choices as manual input was not allowed and no other verification system existed. This event happens amid rising concerns over the validity and administration of the NEET UG 2025 examination. More than 24 lakh students took the test at thousands of locations across the nation. Even though the NTA claimed the examination was usually given without event, this case and others like it cast doubt on the dependability of the biometric systems employed. Given that she had not been at fault for the absence, the petitioner has asked the court to compel the NTA to offer her either another opportunity to re-sit the exam or a relevant remedy. Although biometric authentication is employed to prevent impersonation and misbehavior, law experts note that companies have to also have backup plans ready in case of honest technological failures. The court has not given the petitioner any provisional relief yet, but the following hearing scheduled for beginning of July will allow the NTA to file its official reply. The outcome of the case might have broader consequences for students who might have had comparable difficulties but lacked the financial resources to fight their disqualification. Parent groups and student rights advocacy organizations have voiced the need for greater responsibility and more robust contingency plans at NEET centers. Some groups have urged the Ministry of Education to conduct an independent analysis of biometric systems used in national entrance exams, especially those with such high stakes as NEET. The NTA is now under strong public scrutiny following a number of complaints and arguments related to the 2025 NEET UG cycle. From allegations of paper leaks and impostation to corruption at the center level, the 2022 exam has attracted unprecedented legal and political attention. Given these challenges, the agency has reaffirmed its commitment to openness and justice, assuring that all legitimate complaints will be addressed seriously. The petitioner’s attorney has argued that the denial of opportunity resulting from technological breakdown is a violation of the student’s fundamental right to an education. With its most recent ruling in this case, the court could set a precedent maybe compelling the NTA to evaluate its processes and ensure backup plans are in place for future test cycles. As thousands of students all around India await the NEET UG 2025 results, the Delhi High Court case reminds us that uncorrected little technical mistakes might destroy the hopes of candidates who have devoted years preparing for a single exam day.
