Delhi HC Directs NTA to Form Expert Committee to Review UGC NET History Objections

In a significant order, the Delhi High Court directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to constitute an expert committee to examine alleged errors in the History paper of the University Grants Commission UGC NET December 2025 cycle.

The Court had on February 19 directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to constitute an expert committee within four weeks to examine grievances raised by UGC NET History candidates, while also granting limited relief to one petitioner and observing that objections required structured academic review.

The court issued the direction after candidates challenged alleged discrepancies in the History paper of the University Grants Commission National Eligibility Test (UGC NET).

The examination was conducted between 31.12.2025, and 07.01.2026, and the provisional answer key was released on January 14.

The test determined eligibility for Junior Research Fellowship (JRF), appointment as Assistant Professor, and admission to PhD programmes across India.

The legal challenge began with a writ petition filed by student Kartikeya Kahol, who questioned four specific question IDs - 4324498604, 4324498530, 4324498544, and 4324498600. He argued before the court that these questions required review.

During the first hearing on February 10, the bench asked the NTA to file its response within four days.

According to the petitioner’s counsel, the agency informed the court that a subject expert committee for History had already been formed to examine concerns.

At the subsequent hearing on February 19, the petitioner’s counsel contended that one of the disputed questions did not require expert interpretation because the answer options were visibly identical. He submitted that Kahol had fallen short of the JRF qualification by only two marks and would have qualified if even one of the challenged questions had been corrected.

Taking note of this submission, the court paved the way for awarding him two marks and disposed of his petition.

On the same day, the court directed the NTA to treat applications filed by other aggrieved candidates as formal representations.

The order stated, “The applications shall be treated as representations by the respondent No.1, and the respondent No.1 (NTA) shall constitute an expert committee to evaluate these objections. The expert committee shall look into the applications, hear the applicants, and thereafter pass an order expeditiously, not later than 4 weeks from today (February 19).”

The directive came amid growing dissatisfaction among candidates. As many as 60,777 aspirants appeared for the UGC NET History paper in December, and the results were declared on February 4.

Several candidates alleged that at least nine questions and two translated questions contained errors. Despite objections raised during the challenge window, the final answer key released on February 4 remained unchanged.

Many aspirants took to social media platforms, claiming that significant discrepancies had been overlooked by the agency and its panel of subject experts. Some candidates stated that they narrowly missed the JRF or Assistant Professor cut-off by one or two questions, intensifying concerns over evaluation accuracy.

Following the court’s intervention, the NTA informed students via email on February 21 that a subject expert committee had been formed to re-examine issues related to the History paper.

With the High Court’s directive in place, thousands of candidates awaited clarity on whether further corrections, revised results, or score adjustments would follow.

The expert committee was expected to complete its review within four weeks from February 19, potentially impacting the academic and professional prospects of many aspirants.

Case Title: Kartikey Kahol v. National Testing Agency & Ors.

Source: The Indian Express, NDTV