4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Jun 8, 2026 07:36 PM IST
A Parliamentary panel has requested that the National Testing Agency (NTA) provide a clear definition of what constitutes a “paper leak” and clarify whether any paper leaks have occurred in exams conducted since 2018, according to a PTI report. This inquiry follows the recent appearance of NTA officials before the panel, during which they asserted that there had been no leaks from their system. They claimed that any circulating questions were merely from a ‘guess paper’.
Read | After NEET leak, new plan: Question setters may not know which exam they are working on
The Parliamentary Committee for Education, Women, Children, Youth, and Sports, led by Congress member Digvijaya Singh, is investigating issues related to the NEET paper leak and the controversy surrounding the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) on-screen marking system (OSM). The committee has summoned senior officials from both the NTA and CBSE for this investigation.
The panel has requested written responses from the CBSE regarding the OSM system and from the NTA concerning the NEET exam. Specifically, the panel inquired whether the NTA conducted any investigation into allegations of irregularities in the NEET-UG 2024 paper, aside from the ongoing CBI investigations.
Read | Digvijaya Singh writes to PM Modi, seeks white paper on NEET UG leak allegations
Additionally, the committee asked the NTA about its staff strength over the past three years and any new recruitments made since 2022. They also requested the NTA’s annual report submitted to the Higher Education Department for the last three years. Furthermore, they sought a detailed report on each of the 101 recommendations from the Radhakrishnan Committee Report and the actions taken by the NTA in response to each recommendation.
The high-level committee of experts, chaired by former ISRO chief K. Radhakrishnan, was established by the Centre in June 2024 to recommend measures for the transparent, smooth, and fair conduct of examinations through the NTA. This includes recommendations regarding the agency’s structure, functioning, reforms in the examination process, and improvements in data security protocols.
Story continues below this ad
While the CBSE has been asked to respond to the panel’s inquiries by June 8, the NTA must submit its written answers by June 10. Both agencies have yet to respond, according to sources.
The parliamentary panel further questioned the CBSE about reported “changes” in the various Requests for Proposals (RFPs) issued for the OSM system. They inquired whether any background checks were conducted on COEMPT before awarding it the contract and if the CBSE was aware of COEMPT EduTeck’s past associations with Globarena Technologies, whose evaluation software faced scrutiny during the inquiry into the 2019 Telangana Intermediate results.
The committee sought clarification on why the proviso disqualifying bidders with a history of poor performance was removed in the third RFP for the OSM contract. They also asked why the provision that barred previously blacklisted bidders was “weakened” to exclude only currently blacklisted bidders in the third RFP. Additionally, they questioned why the minimum company turnover requirement for bidders was specifically set at Rs 50 crore.
Story continues below this ad
The panel inquired about the rationale behind changing RFP provisions to favour contractors with access to MeitY-empaneled data centres rather than those with their own data centres. They also sought explanations for why the requirement for a robotic scanner was dropped and replaced with a more generic provision for “sufficient scanners.”
Furthermore, they questioned the removal of the stipulation requiring contractors to scan answer papers without cutting the spine and the reduction of the minimum scanning resolution from 300 DPI to 200 DPI.
Lastly, the panel asked why the criterion requiring experience in handling large projects (involving at least 500,000 students per project) was replaced with a criterion allowing for cumulative answer-book volume across multiple projects.
They had previously requested documents regarding the February 2025, May 2025, and August 2025 RFPs for the OSM system, which the CBSE has yet to provide. The panel also asked the CBSE to share the actions taken in response to the report of the observers of the OSM dry run and whether the Board discussed the observers’ report with the Ministry of Education.
(with inputs from PTI)