NEET UG 2026: SC Examines Alternative Identity Verification For Candidates Unable To Use Fingerprint Biometrics

The Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, while hearing a petition filed by Muazzama Tanveer, observed that “important issues arise for consideration” and requested Senior Advocate Gopal Shankaranarayanan to assist the Court in the matter.

The case has been listed for September 21.

About the Case

Tanveer suffers from Adermatoglyphia, a rare condition in which fingerprint ridges do not develop. According to the petition, the condition has no bearing on her health, intelligence or ability, but prevents conventional fingerprint scanners from verifying her identity.

Tanveer had appeared for NEET UG 2025 on May 4, 2025. Her examination centre allegedly relied on fingerprint-based biometric verification, which could not authenticate her identity.

Although she reached the centre on time, she was reportedly allowed to enter the examination hall only after a delay of around 30 minutes. The petition states that she was not granted additional time to compensate for the delay. She subsequently scored 321 out of 720 in NEET UG 2025.

After the Allahabad High Court dismissed her plea seeking a fresh examination and alternative identity verification on November 26, 2025, Tanveer approached the Supreme Court. The apex court issued notice on January 27, 2026 in her Special Leave Petition.

In the meantime, ahead of the NEET UG 2026 examination, in April the National Testing Agency (NTA) gave an undertaking before the Supreme Court that Tanveer would be permitted to appear using an alternative identity document.

Under the arrangement, her identity could be certified by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate or the Principal of the school she last attended. The Court has now noted that Tanveer was permitted to appear in the re-NEET UG 2026 examination and therefore found no occasion to issue any further interim direction at this stage.

However, it did not close the main issue and instead observed that important questions arise for consideration in the petition.

The petition filed through AoR Dawneesh Shaktivats argues that examination authorities should have a clear and uniform alternative identity-verification protocol for candidates who genuinely cannot be authenticated through fingerprints.

It points to an NTA public notice issued on January 14, 2025, which had referred to Aadhaar-linked alternatives to fingerprint authentication, including facial authentication tools developed by UIDAI. The petition questions why such alternatives were not available at Tanveer’s examination centre when she appeared for NEET UG 2025.

The petitioner has also relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Disha Panchal v. Union of India, concerning candidates who suffered loss of effective examination time because of technical problems during CLAT 2018. In that case, the Court accepted a method of adjusting affected candidates’ scores based on the time actually lost and their answering efficiency during the remaining examination time.

The petition also refers to proceedings before the Delhi High Court concerning NEET UG 2025 candidates who allegedly lost examination time because of biometric verification failures. In those proceedings, the Delhi High Court directed the NTA to streamline its biometric verification process and establish a time-bound grievance redressal mechanism.

Tanveer appeared in the rescheduled NEET UG 2026 examination on June 21, 2026, after the original May 3 examination was affected by a paper leak and subsequently re-conducted. She scored 543 out of 720, compared to 321 marks in NEET UG 2025.

Despite her having been allowed to appear in a subsequent examination, the Supreme Court has kept the broader issue alive for consideration.

The petition therefore raises a larger question: Can examination authorities rely exclusively on fingerprint-based biometric verification when a candidate, through no fault of their own, is medically unable to provide a readable fingerprint?