The supreme court on Monday has sought expert opinion from Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi to solve the issue about a physics question with dual answers in the National Eligibility and Entrance Test (NEET) exams.

The court has asked the director of IIT Delhi to constitute a team of experts who will investigate the question and give a relevant response.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra are hearing petitions about the NEET UG exam controversies.

The court, dictating the order said that as indicated in the question as framed of which students had to select one option as their answer. To resolve the issue as regards the correct answer, the court is of the considered view that an expert opinion should be sought from IIT Delhi.

“We request the Director of IIT Delhi to constitute a team of three experts of the subject concerned. The expert team constituted by the Director is requested to formulate the opinion on the correct option and remit the opinion to the Registrar by 12 noon tomorrow. The Registrar General is requested to communicate the order to the IIT Delhi Director so that expeditious steps for the preparation of the opinion can be taken,” the bench dictated according to LiveLaw.

These experts have been asked to submit their opinion to the registrar by noon on July 23.

The controversy began after some students challenged the National Testing Agency’s decision to state that one question in the multiple-choice physics paper had two possible right answers.  

Previously, on July 18, the Court directed the National Testing Agency to publish the centre-wise results of NEET UG. This, the judges said, would help ascertain if there is any abnormal spike in performance in some centres, especially where paper leak is suspected.

The court has also been hearing petitions seeking reconducting of NEET over the several controversies that now loom over it. Some candidates sought that the exams must be cancelled as they are compromised, and the paper leak is rampant.

Inputs from LiveLaw