The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a plea seeking a fresh NEET-PG 2026 examination for all candidates after finding that the lawyer for the petitioners had taken to social media inviting complaints from candidates before filing the petition..A Bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe pulled up the petitioners and their counsel for attempting to disrupt the examination process.“You are a full-time PIL litigant? This person has become a full-time PIL litigant. Wherever examinations are conducted, you go on to file petitions … We will ask the Bar Council to take serious action,” Justice Narasimha orally remarked..The plea was filed after a power failure at two centres in Jaipur prevented around 2,500 candidates from completing the NEET-PG examination held on August 30. The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) consequently scheduled a separate examination for the affected candidates on September 5.The petitioners sought a fresh examination for all candidates, arguing that conducting a separate test for the affected group would violate the Supreme Court’s May 2025 direction that NEET-PG be held in a single shift.During the hearing, counsel for NBEMS informed the Court that none of the petitioners was among the candidates affected at the Jaipur centres. Two were from Noida and one was from Punjab, the Court was told..The counsel for the petitioners claimed that the disruption was not confined to the two Jaipur centres and that similar problems had occurred at 34 other centres.Justice Narasimha then asked counsel to disclose the basis of this claim.At this stage, NBEMS counsel alleged that the petitioners’ lawyer had invited affected candidates to contact him through social media."His social media posts are with us. There are videos in which he says that if students have any problem, he is mentioning a matter on behalf of petitioner and they may contact him. Such havoc has been created that we are receiving representations from across India,” NBEMS counsel submitted..This submission prompted the Bench to further question the lawyer’s conduct. Justice Narasimha orally indicated that he would ask the Bar Council to take action against the lawyer.“Just for two more briefs, do you realise the kind of harm you are causing to the country?” the judge remarked..Acting on your statement, and without realising that you were working on social media, the Chief Justice assigned the case to us and we are sitting at 4 pm to hear the matter.Supreme Court.Justice Narasimha also took exception to the manner in which the lawyer had secured an urgent hearing in the matter.“Look at how accessible this country is. See, you have the freedom and liberty to walk into the Chief Justice’s Court early in the morning and saying that there is an urgent matter. Acting on your statement, and without realising that you were working on social media, the Chief Justice assigned the case to us and we are sitting at 4 pm to hear the matter, and you end up making a statement that people are complaining and then go on social media,” the judge remarked.“Let the Bar Council of India investigate him,” Justice Aradhe added.Ultimately, the Court dismissed the plea with costs of ₹25,000.
