Parliamentary Panel on NTA Reforms: 382nd Report | CLAT GK

CURRENT AFFAIRS | 11 OCTOBER 2026

The Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports presented its 382nd Report, titled “Reforms and Strengthening of the National Testing Agency (NTA)”, to the Chairman, Rajya Sabha, on Friday, 9 October 2026. According to the press release issued by the Rajya Sabha Secretariat through PIB on 9 October, the committee had considered and adopted the report at its meeting on 25 August 2026.

Its package of NTA reforms urges a shift to computer-based testing (CBT), a large and continuously updated question bank, government-owned test centres in every district, and an exploration of reasonable age and attempt limits for major entrance examinations. It is important to be precise about what this is: a parliamentary committee’s observations and recommendations. None of these proposals is yet law or government policy.

Why the NTA was under review

The committee notes that the NTA conducts India’s most significant public examinations — JEE (Main), NEET (UG), UGC-NET and CUET, among others — for which about 1.2 crore students sit every year. It welcomed the safeguards introduced since 2024 (state- and district-level coordination committees, biometric authentication, mobile jammers, AI-based CCTV analysis), but observed that “the cancellation of NEET (UG) 2026 despite all these measures shows the need for greater procedural and institutional reforms.”

It also pointed to a staffing gap: of 39 sanctioned positions, only 23 officers are in position — a 41% vacancy — and all permanent posts are filled on deputation. The committee recommended that the NTA hire its own permanent specialists in psychometrics, examination security, digital infrastructure and data analytics.

The key recommendations

• Question bank: build “a large, diverse, and continuously updated question bank”; set the final paper very close to the examination using digital tools; and strictly quarantine the paper-vetters until the exam ends (para 10.2).
• CBT for NEET (UG): NEET is described as “an outlier in its reliance on pen-and-paper testing” and should move to CBT, preceded by investment in government-owned infrastructure, including the 1,000 secure government CBT centres proposed by the High-Level Committee of Experts (para 10.7).
• One centre per district: at least one test centre in each district, and all centres owned and operated by the Union and/or State Governments, because sub-contracted private centres have proved a weak link (para 10.7).
• Exam-day procedure: a separate 15-minute window for signing and checking formalities; late-comers to be allowed in after signing an undertaking, for the remaining time only, with no extra time (para 10.8).
• Rallies on exam days: amend the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 so that district administrations withhold permission for rallies or processions on examination days (para 10.9).
• Two-stage format: examine a common prelims followed by course-specific mains for NEET (UG), which handles more than 22 lakh students (para 10.11).
• Blacklisted vendors: a publicly accessible National Registry of Blacklisted Examination Vendors (para 10.12).
• Age and attempt limits: NEET (UG) has no limit on attempts and no real upper age limit, and candidates above 70 have taken it; the Ministry should explore reasonable age and attempt limits for all major examinations, with UGC-NET as a possible exception (para 10.16).

Other recommendations include an annual Equity Audit of results by State, gender, board, medium and social category; free counselling helplines; State representation on the NTA’s Governing Body; an in-house cybersecurity team; and, once infrastructure matures, Computer Adaptive Testing. The committee noted that the NTA has a total revenue surplus of ₹590 crore between FY 2018-19 and FY 2024-25, which could fund government CBT centres and mock tests. It also asked the NTA to refocus on admission tests to higher education alone, and to define a duty of care to candidates, including compensation for administrative cancellations.

Analysis: the trade-offs behind the proposals

The committee’s central logic is simple: a printed paper must be set weeks in advance and transported, and every step is a leak risk. In CBT, papers need not be printed, so they can be assembled from a question bank shortly before the exam. That is why the question bank and CBT recommendations go together.

But the committee itself names the costs. CBT raises access concerns for students from remote and marginalised backgrounds — hence the call for a centre in every district and a hybrid model where infrastructure is weak. Multi-session CBT needs a transparent normalisation method, which the committee says must be explained publicly before any switch. And computer systems can be hacked; the committee recorded that an attempt was investigated by the CBI during JEE (Main) 2021.

The age-and-attempt-limit proposal is the most debatable. Limits could reduce repeat-attempt pressure and align the candidate pool with available seats; critics may argue they restrict opportunity for late starters. Because the committee only asks the Ministry to “explore” such limits, nothing changes for current aspirants unless the government acts.