In News:

India’s higher education entrance system, which affects millions of aspirants annually, has come under renewed scrutiny after a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Educationcriticised the National Testing Agency (NTA) for failing to inspire confidence. The committee flagged delays, errors, and irregularities in major national examinations and called for urgent structural reforms to restore credibility.

Background and Mandate of NTA

Established in 2017 as an autonomous, self-sustaining body under the Ministry of Education, the NTA was created to professionalise and standardise the conduct of high-stakes entrance exams. The idea of a centralised testing agency dates back to the 1992 Programme of Action under the National Policy on Education (1986), and later recommendations by IIT directors in 2010.

The NTA conducts some of India’s largest entrance examinations, including JEE Main, NEET-UG, and CUET-UG, together accounting for over 50 lakh candidates annually. It also administers UGC-NET, CSIR-NET, CUET-PG, CMAT, GPAT and other national-level tests.

Key Concerns Raised by the Parliamentary Committee

The committee observed that repeated administrative lapses have eroded public trust. In recent years, CUET results were delayed, affecting university admissions and academic calendars. Of the 14 exams conducted in 2024, at least five faced serious issues — postponements of UGC-NET, CSIR-NET and NEET-PG, alleged paper leaks in NEET-UG, and delayed CUET results. Additionally, the January 2025 JEE Main exam reportedly saw multiple questions withdrawn due to answer key errors.

Such incidents were described as avoidable and symptomatic of weak systems, inadequate oversight of outsourced vendors, and insufficient in-house capacity.

Financial and Institutional Capacity Issues

The committee highlighted that the NTA collected ?3,512.98 crore over six years and spent ?3,064.77 crore, leaving a surplus of ?448 crore. Despite this, it has not built robust internal capabilities to independently conduct examinations. The panel recommended using the surplus to develop technological infrastructure, human resources, and stronger regulatory mechanisms to supervise vendors.

Interestingly, the committee expressed a preference for pen-and-paper examinations in certain contexts, citing the long track record of institutions like CBSE and UPSC, and suggesting that computer-based systems may be more vulnerable to technical failures and security risks if not robustly managed.

Broader Higher Education Governance Observations

Beyond NTA, the committee reviewed issues related to the University Grants Commission (UGC). It recommended wider consultations through the Central Advisory Board of Education before finalising Draft UGC Regulations 2025, which some fear could centralise control over Vice-Chancellor appointments. The panel also flagged the prolonged vacancy in the UGC Chairperson’s post since April 2025 and urged immediate appointment.

Further, it suggested that the proposed UGC Equity Regulations should explicitly cover discrimination against OBCs and persons with disabilities, and clearly define discriminatory acts to avoid subjective interpretation. The committee also encouraged evaluation of innovative higher education models such as Sonam Wangchuk’s Himalayan Institute of Alternatives, Ladakh.

Conclusion

The concerns around NTA reflect deeper challenges in managing mass-scale, high-stakes assessments in a digital era. Restoring credibility will require institutional capacity-building, transparent processes, stronger accountability, and technological resilience. For a country where competitive exams shape educational and career trajectories, ensuring fairness and reliability is not just an administrative necessity but a matter of public trust and social equity.