NEET UG 2025 | Power Outage At Exam Centers Didn’t Affect Candidates’ Performance, Re-Exam Not Feasible: NTA To MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday (June 23) heard a batch of petitions filed by medical aspirants alleging that a power outage at the examination centres across Indore during the NEET UG 2025 examination impacted their performance.

The candidates argued that the examination centre experienced power outages due to mismanagement and a lack of power backups. The aspirant further claimed that they had to complete their exam using emergency lamps or candles.

However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the National Testing Agency (NTA), presented a report drafted by an independent committee, which showed that despite the one-hour power outage at the 18 affected centres, the candidates had sufficient natural light to complete the exam. 

SG Tushar Mehta submitted, “If there had truly been insufficient lighting, the first indication would have been a significantly lower number of attempted questions. The broader outcome would not have reflected such high performance—yet, 11 candidates from the concerned centres have scored over 600 out of 720 marks“. 

The bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar listed the matter for further hearing on June 30, 2025.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that the examination was conducted at 5,466 centres across India, including 49 centres in Indore. Among these, 18 centres reportedly faced power outages. He stated that approximately 22.9 lakh candidates took the examination, with 27,064 from Indore. However, only 75 candidates from Indore had approached the court, and it remained uncertain which centres these candidates had attended.

SG Mehta proposed a non-adversarial approach, highlighting that a committee of three independent experts had been constituted to examine the issue. Citing the committee’s report, he noted that 11 candidates from Indore had scored over 600 marks—placing them among the 1,300 top scorers nationwide. He added that data showed consistency in the average number of questions attempted across Indore centres, whether or not they experienced power outages. The average ranged between 119 and 127 questions out of 170, indicating that performance was not materially affected. 

In contrast, the petitioners’ counsel argued that the district administration had failed to ensure basic power backup arrangements at the centres. He claimed that more than 100 petitioners were now before the court from 24 centres in Indore, and six more had appeared from two centres in Ujjain. According to the petitioners, the examination observer acknowledged that a power failure occurred and reported that visibility had dropped significantly, from 4 to 1. 

The impartiality of the committee was also questioned by the petitioners, as it had been formed by the National Testing Agency (NTA)—the body that conducted the examination. Addressing the petitioners’ concerns regarding the impartiality of the committee, SG Mehta clarified that the committee members were independent experts and not affiliated with the NTA. 

SG Mehta produced a report that detailed the power conditions at the 49 examination centres in Indore. According to the report, there was either adequate natural light or a DG backup to ensure the smooth conduct of the examination. At the 18 centres where power was disrupted for up to one hour, sufficient natural light was reportedly available to allow candidates to continue writing the exam without interruption. 

SG Mehta read the conclusion of the report, stating, “With 99% confidence, there is no evidence to suggest that the power outage at the centres had any significant adverse effect on candidates’ performance as measured by the number of questions attempted. Then there is no significant difference between candidates who appeared at the affected and non-affected centres in Indore and neighbouring cities”. 

He further argued, “If the petitioners’ prayer (for reconducting the exam) is granted, it would raise the issue of differential difficulty levels across question papers and it would force about 27,000 candidates who will be sitting in the exam centre without their consent“. 

According to SG Mehta, the present petitions stemmed largely from apprehensions and a natural desire among candidates to have performed better. He stated, “Many of the candidates from the concerned centres have scored very good marks. But out of just fear, which every student would have and with the wish that they could do better, they are before the court“. However, he emphasised that the interests of the remaining 27,000 candidates from Indore must also be considered.

The court questioned if there is any case where a number of candidates or a limited number of candidates were allowed to re-appear in an examination. SG Mehta, after taking instructions, informed the court that last year there were some questions with 2 correct answers, so the Supreme Court, based on NTA’s report, directed the affected candidates to re-appear in the examination. 

Counsel for petitioners questioned the facts submitted by SG Mehta, noting that no verifiable evidence was presented by the NTA, including a lack of CCTV footage. The statistical data is just showing the number of questions attempted. “But how will we record the fear and anxiety of the candidates facing such power outages?” the counsel questioned. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the NTA denied access to CCTV footage. 

SG Mehta argued, “There is no dispute that there was a power outage; this is an accepted fact. But the question is, did the power outage impact the candidates?“.

Counsel for the petitioners further argued, “it is not that every student has to give the examination, there must be an option“. SG Mehta, however, opposed this submission, arguing that it would lead to ‘unlevelled playing field‘.

The court, in its order dated June 9, allowed the National Testing Agency to declare the results of all aspirants except the candidates who are parties to the case. The court, in its May 15 order, had temporarily stayed the declaration of results till the next date of hearing. However, the court in its May 15 order allowed the declaration of NEET UG results for centres across India except 11 centres of Indore, which were affected by a power outage.

Case Title: Laxmi Devi Vs National Testing Agency And Others, Writ Petition No. 17344 Of 2025

For Petitioners: Advocate Mradul Bhatnagar, Nitin Singh Bhati and Chinmay Mehta

For Union: Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta and Deputy Solicitor General Himanshu Joshi

For Respondents: Senior Advocates Rupesh Kumar and Romesh Dave