The anatomy of India’s exam paper leaks
Experts say the competitive exam systems breed systemic lapses. What’s the fix?
Hit by a trust deficit after the NEET paper leak, the Modi government responded with stringent measures: Army delivery of question papers, temporary ban on messaging app Telegram, and provisions for increased scrutiny at entry. But will it fix the system, or merely plug the latest leak?
The recent paper leak – for which arrests have been made from across the country – was hardly an isolated incident. NEET saw similar controversies in 2016, 2021 and 2024. Investigations followed, and panels that looked into the scandal pointed to institutional loopholes.
The CBI probe in the latest leak also points to a broken system. Days after the scandal exploded, Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan himself admitted to “a breach in the command chain” – the chain of setting the question paper, printing, transporting and distributing it.
Following the 2024 scandal, the ministry told Parliament that complaints against vendors were dealt with under contractual provisions, with penalties ranging “from deduction of payment to debarment” for deficiencies in service.The Supreme Court has now sought a status report.
The government has so far not disclosed the identities of the vendors involved or any action taken against them in the 2024 and 2026 cases. The investigation into the 2024 irregularities is still going on.
While Pradhan has maintained that the recommendations of the Radhakrishnan Committee, formed in 2024, have been implemented, the Supreme Court has also sought its details. The committee led by ex-ISRO chairman Dr K Radhakrishnan had recommended strengthening the NTA’s accountability mechanisms and stressed that safeguarding the integrity of examinations must be a continuous process.
Among the CBI’s key arrests in the latest leak is Pune-based professor PV Kulkarni, part of the paper-setting committee. The agency has uncovered networks behind the leak, allegedly run by three key conspirators. They said papers were reportedly handwritten, scanned and circulated.
A Parliamentary Standing Committee led by Congress MP Digvijaya Singh on June 17 called for the nationwide “blacklisting” of tainted vendors. It also recommended the adoption of a “foolproof” protocol, publishing of a time-bound implementation roadmap, increasing allocation towards National Education Policy implementation, and better utilization of NTA’s surplus earning of over Rs 400 crore for strengthening its testing and regulatory capabilities.
Crucially, the committee highlighted that some firms previously involved in exam irregularities were still securing contracts, adding that “a lot of improvement is needed in the NTA”.
The NTA, meanwhile, has informed the Supreme Court that a “High-Powered Steering Committee” has recommended stringent safeguards for the NEET re-test, including mandatory CCTV checks, preservation of its footage for 90 days, and forensic analysis after the examination. It has also made structural changes in its leadership, including the creation of 16 new internal posts, including Director and Joint Director-level positions.
Meanwhile, its recommendation to temporarily ban messaging app Telegram, where leaked papers were reportedly circulated, has met with criticism.
The platform facing a temporary ban in India from June 16 to June 22 to “prevent cheating and misinformation” has moved the Delhi High Court challenging the restrictions. The court, however, upheld the ban.
CEO Pavel Durov posted on X: “India’s IT ministry banned Telegram for one week because some users shared leaked exam questions. This punishes 150M+ ordinary Telegram users in India - not the insiders who leaked the exam materials. And the ban hasn’t stopped anything. The leaks just moved to other apps.”
To navigate the compromised logistical system and prevent physical theft of the question papers, Pradhan has also proposed to make the NEET UG exam online from the next academic year. He said conducting a computer-based test instead of using OMR sheets will address the “root issue”.
However, without addressing persistent vulnerabilities arising from internal corruption and a lack of accountability, the root issue is likely to persist.