Introduction
The Rajya Sabha passed the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Bill, 2024 on February 9, following its approval by the Lok Sabha on February 6. President Droupadi Murmu signed the bill into law on February 12. This Act is designed to prevent cheating and other unfair practices in public examinations conducted by organizations such as the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), the Staff Selection Commission (SSC), railways, banking recruitment examinations, and the National Testing Agency (NTA), among others.
The recent question paper leaks in the NEET-UG and UGC-NET exams have caused national outrage, likely prompting the government to take a strong stance against malpractice in public examinations, despite the fact that the new Act cannot be applied retroactively.
When introducing the Bill, the government recognized the existing legislative gap in addressing unfair practices and offenses committed by entities conducting public examinations for the Centre and its agencies. In the Statement of Objects and Reasons, the government acknowledged that such malpractices result in delays and cancellations, negatively affecting the futures of millions of young people.
What are the Key Takeaways?
Section 2(1)(f) of the Act defines “institution” in a way that excludes the National Testing Agency (NTA), which is currently under scrutiny for its errors and actions. According to this provision, an “institution” includes any agency, organization, body, association of persons, business entity, company, partnership, or sole proprietorship, regardless of its name, but excludes the public examination authority and any service provider hired by such an authority.
Public examinations are those conducted by the authorities listed in the Schedule to the Act or notified by the Central government. These authorities include the Union Public Service Commission, Staff Selection Commission, Railway Recruitment Board, National Testing Agency, Institute of Banking Personnel Selection, and various Central government departments and their attached offices responsible for recruitment.
The drafted norms will encompass pre-examination activities, including pre-audits to assess the readiness of public examination centers, candidate check-in, biometric registration, security and screening, seat allocation, and the setting and loading of question papers. Additionally, they will cover invigilation during the examination, post-examination activities, and guidelines for providing scribes. The new rules permit the public examination authority to utilize the services of current or retired employees from the central government, state government, public sector undertakings, public sector banks, government universities, autonomous bodies, and other government organizations for roles such as center coordinators or other duties related to public examinations.
The Act defines unfair means as including unauthorized access to or leaking of question papers or answer keys, assisting candidates improperly, tampering with computer networks or resources, falsifying documents for shortlisting or finalizing merit lists or ranks, conducting fake examinations, and issuing fake admit cards or offer letters for monetary gain. It also bans prematurely disclosing confidential exam information and unauthorized entry into exam centers to create disruptions.
The Act is seen as severe due to its strict punitive measures. Section 9 states that all offenses under this Act are cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable.
Section 10(1) stipulates that anyone using unfair means or committing offenses under this Act will face imprisonment for a term of no less than three years, potentially extending to five years, and a fine up to Rs.10 lakh. Section 10(2) holds the service provider responsible with a fine up to Rs.1 crore, and the cost of the examination will be proportionately recovered from them. Additionally, the service provider will be prohibited from conducting public examinations for four years.
The Act places the burden of proving innocence on the accused. According to Section 10(4), an individual will not be punished if they can demonstrate that the offense was committed without their knowledge and that they exercised due diligence to prevent it.
The Act designates the chairperson, members, officers, and other employees of the public examination authority as ‘public servants’ under the BNS. Section 14 protects these public servants from lawsuits, prosecutions, or other legal proceedings for actions done in good faith or intended to be done in the performance of their official duties or exercise of their powers. The first proviso to Section 14 states that public servants of any public examination authority are subject to administrative action according to the service rules of that authority. The second proviso indicates that nothing prevents legal proceedings against such public servants if there is a prima facie case establishing the commission of an offense under this Act.
Conclusion
The Act’s strict measures are intended to discourage cheating and unfair practices. However, the effectiveness of these provisions is debatable, as similar state laws in Uttarakhand, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Uttar Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh have not effectively deterred cheating in public examinations. This raises concerns about whether the new law will genuinely prevent unfair practices or if it is simply a symbolic gesture.
Add a Comment