Madras HC puts interim stay on NEET-UG results
The Madras high court on Saturday imposed an interim stay on the declaration of NEET-UG 2025 results following a petition by 13 candidates, who alleged the entrance exam for admissions to undergraduate medical medical courses had been disrupted at a centre in the Avadi area in Chennai due to a power cut and water logging.
The petitioners, all students from several districts of Tamil Nadu, who had appeared for the exam at the centre on May 4, told a vacation bench of the high court that the exam had thus, begun late. They also claimed the examination centre at Avadi got waterlogged due to heavy rains and the students were made to shift to another centre mid-exam.
When the petition came up for hearing on May 16, justice V Lakshminarayan enquired if the students were shifted to another centre while they were writing the exam and if there had also been a power cut? The judge then granted the interim stay on the declaration of results saying the students must be granted a chance to plead their case.
As per the petitioner students, at the Avadi centre, candidates had been instructed to report by 11 am for the 2pm exam. However, they were let inside the premises only at around 2.45pm. From 3pm to 4.15 pm, a power cut forced all candidates to continue writing in poor lighting conditions.
It had also been raining and soon after rainwater began entering the centre premises, forcing the authorities to halt the exams and shift the students to another centre. However, none of them were granted any extra time to compensate for the inconvenience and such loss of time.
Some of the petitioners have even asked that they be permitted to re-take the examination. In their petition, the students argued that such disruptions had violated their fundamental right to a fair opportunity under Article 21 of the Constitution. They urged the court to stay the result declaration and allow affected students to reappear for the exam.
The court reiterated that students deserved a chance to present their case and thus, adjourned the matter to June 2 after halting the declaration of the results until then.
Earlier this week, the Madhya Pradesh high court had also stayed the declaration of NEET-UG 2025 results after a similar plea from a student in Indore.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
US court declines Republican request to intervene in Pennsylvania voting dispute
The US Supreme Court passed up a chance to give politicians more power over how federal elections are conducted, declining on Friday to hear a Republican challenge to a Pennsylvania judicial decision requiring the counting of provisional ballots cast by voters who make mistakes on their mail-in justices turned away an appeal by the Republican National Committee and Republican Party of Pennsylvania of a decision by Pennsylvania's top court on provisional ballots that the plaintiffs said ran afoul of legislature-crafted voting rules, violating the US Constitution's election-related dispute returned to the Supreme Court after the justices, on the eve of the November 2024 presidential election, rejected the emergency bid by the Republicans to block tallying the provisional ballots. The Republicans objected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's October ruling in favour of two Butler County voters who sought to have their provisional ballots counted after their mail-in ballots were rejected during that state's 2024 presidential primary election for lacking secrecy rules in states like Pennsylvania that often play a pivotal role in determining the outcome of US presidential elections are a particularly sensitive President Donald Trump prevailed in Pennsylvania last November, but lost the state in 2020 to his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden, who won the presidency that case follows a major 2023 Supreme Court ruling that allows the justices to second-guess state courts if they undermine the power that the Constitution gives state legislatures to craft election 6-3 ruling, which upheld a North Carolina state court's decision that invalidated a Republican-drawn congressional map as unlawfully disadvantaging Democrats, also rejected a more extreme theory advanced by many Republicans and conservatives that would have removed any role of state courts and state constitutions in regulating federal ruling, however, stopped short of announcing a legal test for determining when state courts have ventured too far in "arrogating to themselves" a legislature's the Pennsylvania case, Republicans asked the Supreme Court to answer that question, contending that the state supreme court's ruling violated the Constitution's elections provisions, including that the "times, places and manner" of federal elections "shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof."Provisional ballots generally protect voters from being excluded from the voting process if their eligibility is uncertain on Election Day. The vote is counted once officials confirm intervened to defend Butler County's decision not to count the ballots from these voters, saying Pennsylvania's election law does not allow provisional ballots to be counted if a mail-in ballot was received on time by a county board of intervened on the side of the voters, contending that if a mail-in ballot is defective and cannot be counted, that person has not yet voted and a provisional ballot must be divided Pennsylvania Supreme Court last October sided with the voters, saying that provisional ballots prevent double voting while protecting voters' right to have one vote action by the court was unexpected. The court had planned to release it on Monday along with its other regularly scheduled orders, but a software glitch on Friday prematurely sent email notifications concerning the court's decision in the case. "As a result, the court is issuing that order list now," said court spokesperson Patricia is not the first time the court has inadvertently disclosed action in sensitive cases. Last year, an apparent draft of a ruling in a case involving emergency abortion access in Idaho was briefly uploaded to the court's website before being taken down. That disclosure represented an embarrassment for the top US judicial body, coming two years after the draft of a blockbuster ruling rolling back abortion rights was leaked in InMust Watch IN THIS STORY#United States of America
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
3 hours ago
- First Post
'Fake news': Amid legal setbacks, Trump wins 'Gulf of America' battle against AP
The AP sued in February after the White House restricted the news outlet's access over its decision to continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in its coverage despite Trump renaming the body of water the Gulf of America read more President Donald Trump is free to bar The Associated Press from some White House media events for now, after a U.S. appeals court on Friday paused a lower court ruling mandating that AP journalists be given access. The divided ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit temporarily blocks an order by US District Judge Trevor McFadden, who ruled on April 8 that the Trump administration must allow AP journalists access to the Oval Office, Air Force One and White House events while the news agency's lawsuit moves forward. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The 2-1 ruling was written by US Circuit Judge Neomi Rao, joined by fellow Trump appointee U.S. Circuit Judge Gregory Katsas. Rao wrote that the lower court injunction 'impinges on the President's independence and control over his private workspaces' and that the White House was likely to ultimately defeat the Associated Press' lawsuit. The Associated Press in a statement said it was disappointed by the decision and weighing its options. A White House spokesperson, Taylor Budowich, in a statement on the social media platform X said the Associated Press has no 'right to unfettered access to limited spaces, like the Oval Office and Air Force One.' In a dissent, Circuit Judge Cornelia Pillard, an appointee of President Barack Obama, said her two colleagues' ruling cannot be squared with 'any sensible understanding of the role of a free press in our constitutional democracy.' The AP sued in February after the White House restricted the news outlet's access over its decision to continue referring to the Gulf of Mexico in its coverage despite Trump renaming the body of water the Gulf of America. The AP's lawyers argued the new policy violated the First Amendment of the Constitution, which protects free speech rights. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD McFadden, who was appointed by Trump during his first term, said in his ruling that if the White House opens its doors to some journalists it cannot exclude others based on their viewpoints. Trump administration lawyers said the president has absolute discretion over media access to the White House and that McFadden's ruling infringed on his ability to decide whom to admit to sensitive spaces. 'The Constitution does not prohibit the President from considering a journalist's prior coverage in evaluating how much access he will grant that journalist,' lawyers for the administration said in a court filing. On April 16, the AP accused the Trump administration of defying the court order by continuing to exclude its journalists from some events and then limiting access to Trump for all news wires, including Reuters and Bloomberg. Reuters and the AP both issued statements denouncing the new policy, which puts wire services in a larger rotation with about 30 other newspaper and print outlets. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Other media customers, including local news organizations that have no presence in Washington, rely on the wire services' real-time reports of presidential statements as do global financial markets. The AP says in its stylebook that the Gulf of Mexico has carried that name for more than 400 years and, as a global news agency, the AP will refer to it by its original name while acknowledging the new name Trump has chosen.
Hans India
3 hours ago
- Hans India
NEET-PG to be held on Aug 3 in single shift
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences to reschedule the NEET-PG exam to August 3, 2025. A bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Augustine George Masih allowed the application filed by the NBE for extension of time to conduct the NEET exam till August 3, 2025. On May 30, the Supreme Court, while ordering the NBE to hold NEET-PG 2025 in single shift instead of two shifts, had directed it to conduct the exam on the initially scheduled date of June 15, 2025. At the same time, the Court had allowed the NBE to seek extension of time. Later, on June 3, the NBE filed an application seeking extension of time, saying that it needs to increase the number of centres by two-fold (from 450 to 900) and that security arrangements have to be done. The NBE also said that, even according to their technology partner TCS, August 3 is the nearest available date to conduct NEET. During the hearing, the bench initially questioned the NBE, asking why time was needed till August 3. The counsel for the NBE explained that the exam was initially proposed to be held in 450 centres with over 2.5 lakh candidates. Since the Court has directed the holding of exam in one shift, the number of centres will have to be doubled. The counsel said that it will take time to identify the centres and to ensure security arrangements.
