Archive · 25 Aug 2026
NEET-UG Petitioners Seek Reconstitution of Jantar Mantar Probe Panel
Some students and other petitioners want the Supreme Court to change a committee investigating a protest.
The protest happened at Jantar Mantar during a march toward Parliament on July 20.
It was connected to allegations of leaks in the NEET-UG examination.
The petitioners said they had serious concerns about the committee.
The government’s lawyer disagreed with their request.
He said the issue should be heard together with the main case.
The Chief Justice said the committee works directly under the Supreme Court.
He also said the court would watch how the committee performs.
The court has not finished the case.
Petitioners asked the Supreme Court to reconstitute its committee investigating the alleged police crackdown on a July 20 Jantar Mantar protest.
The protest was linked to allegations of NEET-UG paper leaks and involved a march toward Parliament.
Chief Justice Surya Kant said the five-member committee is working under the Supreme Court’s direct supervision.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed separate consideration of the request and asked that it be heard with the main petitions.
The court said it would consider the committee members’ abilities and profiles, while cautioning petitioners against naming preferred judges.
- Who
- Petitioners, represented in court by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Advocate Prashant Bhushan; the Union government was represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
- What
- Petitioners sought reconstitution of the Supreme Court-appointed High-Powered Enquiry Committee investigating developments related to the Jantar Mantar protest.
- When
- The request was raised before the Supreme Court on Tuesday; the committee was appointed on August 18.
- Where
- The hearing took place in the Supreme Court, concerning events at Jantar Mantar during a march toward Parliament.
- Why
- Petitioners cited serious misgivings about the committee, while the government opposed considering the request separately from the main petitions.
Petitioners’ concerns
Government and court response
Whether the committee should be reconstituted
Petitioners’ concerns
Petitioners said many applicants had serious or common misgivings about the committee and sought a hearing on reconstituting it.
Government and court response
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed the request and said it should be considered with the main petitions rather than separately.
Choice of committee members
Petitioners’ concerns
The application reportedly named judges whom the petitioners preferred to head the committee, although their lawyer said he did not want to discuss specific names during mentioning.
Government and court response
The Chief Justice said the court did not appreciate naming judges and emphasized that the committee operates under the Supreme Court’s direct supervision.
- Protest date
- July 20
- Protest location
- Jantar Mantar, during a march toward Parliament
- Issue connected to protest
- Alleged NEET-UG paper leaks
- Committee size
- Five members
- Committee chair
- Former Supreme Court judge R Subhash Reddy
- Committee status
- Working under the Supreme Court’s direct supervision
- Government position
- Solicitor General Tushar Mehta opposed separate listing of the reconstitution request