Refusing relief to a 49-year-old doctor who was not permitted to appear for NEET examination since he did not have required documents, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court remarked that several candidates resort to malpractices which reminds it of “Munnabhai MBBS”.
The high court dismissed a petition by Dr Shyamsundar Patil seeking direction to the National Board of Examinations to hold the National Eligibility-Cum-Entrance Test for Super Specialty 2023 exam for him.
The doctor, who has several years of practice in his hometown Latur, was not allowed to enter the examination centre at Hyderabad in September as he did not have a physical copy of his permanent registration certificate issued by the Medical Council. Patil said he had a copy on his phone but electronics were not allowed in the examination centre, he was not allowed to enter.
Authorities cannot be faulted: Court
The high court noted that the authorities cannot be faulted. Due to technological advancement and development, there are instances when students have resorted to various methods/tactics of manufacturing admit cards, identity cards, hacking websites and carrying air-pods or electronic earbuds in the examination hall, in order to resort to malpractices in the examinations, the court said.
“We are reminded of the movie 'Munnabhai MBBS', and it would not be too much to say that there are several candidates who resort to such practices. There are instances when the results of the NEET-UG and PG exams are hacked by hackers, results are manufactured and higher scores in the examination results are published on such fictitious websites,” said a division bench of Justices RV Ghuge and YG Khobragade on October 31.
The bench also took note of the fact that the examination authority has been consistently informing the candidates on the documents to be carried along with them to the examination hall and also about the electronic instruments and gadgets that are not to be carried to the hall.
The mechanism designed by the examination authorities to ensure that the examination is conducted in a fair manner, it said. “They intend to ensure that a proxy candidate or a candidate resorting to unfair means does not participate in the examination,” the judges underscored.
Patil showed registration certificate on his mobile
As Patil did not carry a physical copy of his registration certificate and relied on showing on his mobile, which was not permitted inside the examination centre, “laches cannot attributed to the Respondent authorities” and it could only be said that the Petitioner should blame himself for having failed in strictly following the standing instructions for the students, the bench said.
“Had the petitioner carried the Medical Registration certificate, there was no embargo for him to enter the examination hall. Therefore, it could only be said that the petitioner should blame himself for having failed in strictly following the standing instructions for the students,” the court said. It added that it would not be reasonable to direct the authorities to hold a fresh examination only for the petitioner.
