IN THE PAST FEW MONTHS, paper leaks, examination glitches, discrepancies in the computation of marks, and mismanagement in conducting the examinations have become alarmingly commonplace. On May 30, 2026, due to a technical glitch, around 3,765 students couldn’t appear for the CUET (UG) examination, which is conducted by the National Testing Agency (‘NTA’) — an autonomous body functioning under the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education. While admitting the glitch, NTA has ordered an inquiry into its causes, which would be conducted by Tata Consultancy Services (‘TCS’), responsible for conducting the exam. Finding the fault and fixing accountability would take some time; however, the CUET UG examination fiasco brings into sharp relief the deep rot in the idea and place of education in India. When considered in light of the NEET UG 2026 paper leak and CBSE answer-sheet mismatch to the SSC GD exam controversy, the present failure shows a tapestry rather than being an aberration.
Students from a remote rural region with an intersectional identity struggle to enroll in higher education and often travel far away from their homes to appear for an exam. They see these exams as an opportunity for aspiration and upward mobility. Ironically, these institutional failures shatter their dream, leading to mental health distress, financial debt, and even suicides – which the Supreme Court has acknowledged in a plea filed on the regulation of coaching industries.
When the above-flagged controversies are analysed in seriatim, what transpires is that centralisation of power has emerged as a common phenomenon across sectors, undermining the federal character of the Indian Constitution. So much so that states such as Tamil Nadu locked horns with the Union on the issue of the NEET examination. To appreciate how federalism – which is one of the basic structures of the Indian Constitution – applies here, one simply has to look at the scope of power which the Constitution provides to the Union and the states pertaining to legislation in their respective field. Education is listed in List III of the Seventh Schedule under Article 246(2) and both the Union and the states have shared responsibility for making laws. However, the implementation of the National Education Policy (‘NEP’), which took place without the Parliament’s approval, stands in the teeth of the constitutional structure.
The implementation of the National Education Policy, which took place without the Parliament’s approval, stands in the teeth of the constitutional structure.
The long saga of NTA’s misconduct
NTA’s impropriety has a long-lasting history since its inception. The first controversy arose in the NEET (UG) 2020 examination, when NTA released inaccurate scores of a few candidates, leading to Vidhi Suryavanshi’s suicide. In 2022, meanwhile, the JEE Main result was also allegedly compromised due to irregularities. Reportedly, the JEE Main result score was also consistent with anomalies in 2024. On a question raised regarding CUET (UG) in the Rajya Sabha, Dr. Subhas Sarkar, Minister of State in the Ministry of Education, stated that 9,25,142 (nearly 62 percent) appeared out of 14,90,000 registered candidates. A significantly low turnout of candidates raises grave concerns about the efficiency of NTA. It has also been reported that NTA changed the centres at the last moment in 2022 and 2024, creating chaos among candidates, which led some of them to miss their examination.
Similar patterns were observed in the conduct of the UGC-NET examination, which is the eligibility test for admission to PhD, Assistant Professor, and Junior Research Fellowship. Irregularities were reported in the UGC-NET June 2024 exam, which was later cancelled by the Ministry of Education, followed by the allegedly compromised NEET (UG) 2024 entrance.
These repeated misconducts don’t just tantamount to playing with the future of millions of students in India but also create uncertainties, hopelessness, and among millions of young minds in schools and colleges. Consequently, job seekers, especially those who are graduates, are peaking.
Solution: Dismantling of NTA a must, but not sufficient!
Against the above backdrop, arguably, the dismantling of the NTA is a demand that many organisations, including All India Forum for Right To Education (‘AIFRTE’)—a forum of students, teachers, parents, and social justice-based organisations—that are working in the field of right to education, have been putting forward since the inception of NTA along with repealing of NEP 2020, and rightly so. AIFRTE, along with its fraternal organisations, also organised multiple protest demonstrations, consultation meetings, and memorandum submissions to the Ministry of Education to this effect. The opposition, led by the Congress party, has dubbed the NTA the ‘National Trauma Agency’, the ‘National Tamasha Agency’ and the ‘National Corruption Agency’, citing its consistent failures as evidence that the centralised examination system is broken beyond repair.
The NTA’s consistent mishandling of national examinations raises serious institutional and constitutional issues. That is, the concentration of power without corresponding accountability. Federalism is not merely a mechanism for governance; it is a constitutional safeguard designed to disperse power, create multiple centers of decision-making, and prevent the failure of a single institution from affecting an entire nation. When crucial educational decisions impacting millions of students are vested in one central authority, errors and irregularities acquire nationwide consequences. Greater state-wide participation in educational policy and admissions would not only accommodate India’s diversity but also strengthen constitutionalism by ensuring that power remains accountable, contestable, and subject to democratic checks.
These paper leaks are symptoms not just of the breakdown of an examination system but also the breakdown of a corporate-ridden socio-political system.
It is alarming especially when these high stakes examinations such as CBSE senior secondary examinations are left to profit making private bodies like Coempt Edu Teck Private Limited—which changed its name from Globarena Technologies after it was charged in 2019 Telangana intermediate exam issue which led to death of 20 students by suicide. Coempt allegedly doesn’t have prior experience to handle examinations for millions of students. This signals to a rapid expansion of commercialisation of high stakes examinations.
In light of these concerns, AIFRTE argued in a detailed critique paper published in 2020—shortly after the introduction of NEP 2020, that the policy ignores “the widespread inequalities and disparities as well as diversities in the school systems of different States/UTs, thereby undermining the federal role of the States/UTs guaranteed under Article 246 (Seventh Schedule) of the Constitution.”
There is a grave concern about how these agencies that can’t even take accountability for the bags and other gadgets that a student brings while coming to appear for an examination, take accountability for paper leaks, mismanagement, glitches, etc.
While dismantling the NTA is a popular demand among students, activists, and professors, coupled with ensuring decentralised and transparent examination-conducting bodies, the solution is never confined to it. Because NTA is just part of the problem, which is inevitably rooted in the breakdown of a centralised, corporate-ridden examination system, further based upon a condition of perennial and widespread unemployment, coupled with shrinking public sector institutions both for education and employment. In fact, these paper leaks are symptoms not just of the breakdown of an examination system but also the breakdown of a corporate-ridden socio-political system.
At educational levels, meaningful decentralisation requires a significantly greater role for states in shaping educational policy, curricula, admissions, and institutional priorities in accordance with their distinct social, economic, linguistic, and cultural contexts. Excessive centralisation through uniform policies and examinations often overlooks India’s diversity and limits the ability of states to address local educational needs and inequalities. Such decentralisation must also be accompanied by the dismantling and strict regulation of the coaching industry, which has evolved into a parallel education system that privileges those with greater social, cultural and economic resources and creates additional barriers for underprivileged students. A stronger state-led public education system can reduce dependence on coaching centers and make educational opportunities more accessible and equitable. More fundamentally, the prevailing emphasis on competitive examinations reflects broader structural inequalities within the economy, where the rhetoric of merit and competition often conceals unequal access to resources and opportunities. By empowering states to develop context-sensitive and inclusive educational frameworks, decentralisation can serve as an important tool for democratising education, reducing social inequalities, and expanding genuine opportunities for social mobility.
At times of crisis, unemployment also shoots high, as does this competition. Here, merit becomes a tool of exclusion. Even when that merit fails to be excluded, rampant corruption comes onto the scene. The death knell of social justice rings for the flourishing of corruption and social capital. NTA (openly) and CBSE (covertly) become catalysts for this process. A radical restructuring of this neo-liberal education, institutions, and employment model is the need of the hour.
The authors are grateful to Advocate Zeeshan Ahmad for his inputs.