NEET-UG 2024 hearing: SC refuses to cancel exam, says no evidence to suggest a systemic breach

The ​seven-member high-level committee​ headed by K. Radhakrishnan, former Chairman, ISRO and Chairman of the Board of Governors at IIT-Kanpur will suggest reforms in the conduct of the NEET examination. 

The committee has been asked to abide by the directions given in the verdict. 

Also Read: ​After NEET and UGC-NET debacles, NTA reform panel vows to check irregularities in exams​

SC clarifies that students with individual grievances will be at liberty to move the concerned High Court. 

SC records that IIT Delhi has opined that option four in the ambiguous Physics question is the correct answer.

“IIT Delhi leaves no ambiguity about the answer. Since options two and four answers are mutually exclusive, NTA shall conclude that option four is the only correct answer to the question”, the order states. 

The court is however silent about cancelling the negative mark on the question. 

A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud refuses to cancel the NEET-UG 2024 medical exam. 

SC says that a fresh test could have serious consequences for close to 23 lakh students, disrupt the admission schedule of the medical courses and hinder the availability of qualified medical professionals in future. 

“Absence of material on record at the present stage, the data produced city-wise, centre-wise, and comparison of years of 2022, 2023, and 2024 do not indicate a systemic leak of question paper which indicates destruction of the sanctity of the exam.

In arriving at the ultimate conclusion, the court is guided by the well-settled test of whether it is possible to segregate the wrongdoers from the innocents among students. 

If the probe reveals, the involvement of an increased number of beneficiaries. In future, action shall be pursued against students found to have done wrong notwithstanding the counselling process. Students will be banned from participating in the admission process”, the order states. 

“At this stage, in order to obviate any controversy, the court has independently scrutinised the data given by the NTA. On the basis of the material on record, in the present stage, there is an absence of material to show that the result of the exam stands vitiated and there was a systemic breach of the sanctity of the exam”, the Chief Justice records in the order. 

SC says that there is no dispute that the NEET-UG 2024 paper has been leaked in Hazaribagh and Patna

1. The leak of the NEET paper took place at Hazaribagh and Patna is not in dispute

2. Following the transfer of the investigation, the CBI has filed status reports. The CBI says the probe is continuing. It has indicated that at the present stage, the material has emerged that 155 students from the exam centres at Hazaribagh and Patna appear to be beneficiaries of the fraud. The investigation has not attained finality. Govt has produced IIT (Madras) report submitted on segregation and spread of leak. 

“Arguments concluded. Judgment has been reserved. In a matter like this, final conclusions of the court be recorded at the present stage since there is an urgent need to provide certainty and finality to the dispute which has occurred and affects careers of over 2 million students. Reasons for the conclusion will follow”, the CJI records in the order. 

“....petitioner sought that the directions should be issued for convening a retest on the ground (1) the question paper was leaked; (2) there are systemic deficiencies in the modalities conducted for the examination. 23, 33000 candidates appeared for the exam. 

They are competing for 1.08 Lakh seats of which 56000 seats are in government hospitals, the balance 5,2000 being in private institutions. The 50 percentile represents the cut-off for qualification. 

The examination consists of 180 questions, 4 marks each, making a total of 720 marks overall, with one negative mark assigned for each incorrect answer”, the order states. 

A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud begins dictating the verdict in open court. 

More details to follow. 

The Bench retires for a five-minute recess. 

The hearing has continued for the whole day. It is nearly an hour past normal court hours. 

Mr. Hooda says that schools with no boundary walls, and no government teachers are involved as exam centres. 

“...There is no system in place. Easy to manipulate. Only 22-23 NTA employees are on deputation. The rest are private people employed in centres”, he adds. 

Commencing his rejoinder submissions, Mr. Hooda appearing for the petitioners points out that the main accused of the gang behind the leak has not been arrested. 

“The confidence of the Solicitor General that the leak is limited to Patna and Hazaribagh is unfounded. The situation is evolving”, he asserts. 

Addressing this argument, the CJI says – “Should the court cancel the entire exam on the hypothesis that the accused is not arrested? That the leak is not confined to Hazaribagh and Patna? CBI’s probe in 10 or 15 days may reveal otherwise. But today we do not have anything before us to show that the leak crossed to other parts of the country.” 

Mr. Hooda underscores that unless the court is convinced that all tainted persons have been identified and acted against, the sanctity of the exam is questionable and a retest should be ordered.

A lawyer seeks exemption for candidates from vulnerable, marginalised, tribal and EWS categories. She says that they have obviously not benefitted from the paper leak. 

Addressing this contention, the CJI says – “If we order a re-test, we cannot make any exceptions. But the state of the poor students and the expenses they would be forced to incur would make a case against the retest”. 

CJI: “Assuming we are not ordering a re-test, a decision we will take shortly, can we say anyone who has chosen option 2 shall not be given a negative mark?”

After consulting the NTA Director, Mr. Mehat says that it is a “fair suggestion”. He however adds that it should not become a precedent. 

CJI notes that 9.28 lakh students, the larger portion of candidates, gave the correct answer by choosing option 4.

Justice Misra adds that any student who knows her fundamentals would opt for option 4. Others who learn by rote, blinding trusting the textbooks, may get it wrong, he says. 

[ IIT Delhi’s expert panel also declared option 4 to be the correct response to the contentious Physics question] 

The discussion returns to the ambiguous Physics question.

CJI says there is only one correct answer to that question. Here, answer options 2 and 4 exclude each other.

Also Read: NEET-UG 2024: Option 4 correct in Physics question, IIT-Delhi expert panel informs Supreme Court

NEET-UG 2024: Option 4 correct in Physics question, IIT-Delhi expert panel informs Supreme Court

IIT Delhi panel confirms fourth option as correct answer in NEET-UG physics question, impacting over 4 lakh candidates.

Justice Misra asks if there was a forensic comparison between the leaked paper and the one which appeared on Telegram.

Mr. Mehta, after consulting with CBI officers, says there has been no forensic report comparing the two.

Mr. Mehta says that the viral video purportedly showing photos of a leaked NEET-UG question paper was doctored. 

“The actual images were uploaded subsequent to the date of examination. Such unsustainable, vague and doctored videos cannot be considered in adjudication of the allegations of paper leak in NEET (UG) 2024”, he asserts. 

He adds that if the SC were to order a re-test merely on an apprehension that leaks spread across the country, it would adversely impact 23 lakh students. He points out that the CBI report says that the leak is contained in four locations.

Indicating that the Court intends to wrap up arguments today, the CJI says 23 lakh children who took the exam “cannot be kept on tenterhooks like this”. 

“We don’t want this to spill over. Not good from an institutional perspective also for children who want a sense of finality to this”, he asserts. 

Mr. Mehta says the number of student beneficiaries of the leak was 155. The gang behind the leak was amateurs, otherwise the agency could not have got to them through the burnt papers. Their modus operandi was confined to Hazaribagh and Patna. They would not have profited from an uncontrolled spread of the leak. 

“ They (accused) got only two hours to mug up the question which is evident from the marks they got. Some have got only 111... Only three students crossed 523”, he adds. 

CBI says the main accused who breached the Oasis school strong room shared the pics of the question paper electronically with another gang member who took printouts for the solvers housed in a guesthouse. 

CJI asks CBI if there is any forensic evidence to show that the leaked paper was not sent to others. 

In response, the CBI says that the mobiles have not been recovered.

CBI tells SC that so far it has found that the paper leak originated in Hazaribagh, Jharkhand and later transmitted to one centre in Patna. 

The CJI has repeatedly questioned whether there is a need to scrap the exam in its entirety if the leak occurred only at specific centres.

Apprising the court about the ongoing CBI investigation, Mr. Mehta says that ​​in the case of the Oasis School leak​​, the breakthrough came when the Bihar Police retrieved a piece of burnt paper. The brunt paper contained the unique number of a NEET question paper.

On May 5 morning, CCTV footage caught a person breaching the strong room in Oasis school where the question papers were stored in one-time-tearable plastic covers before distribution to the candidates during the exam.

The intruder had taken photos of the question paper and passed it on to eight solvers. Photocopies of the leaked paper along with the solved answers were shown to students who had paid the gang. They were told to memorise the answers. The copies may have then been burnt.

The candidate who got the original copy of the question paper had given a statement to the CBI that the plastic cover in which she received it was sealed together using a lighter.

“This candidate was genuine and had no part in the leak. The unique number of the burnt scrap had led the CBI to this candidate”, Mr. Mehta says. 

Also Read: ​​CBI arrests Jharkhand school principal, vice-principal in NEET paper leak case​​

​​

CBI arrests Jharkhand school principal, vice-principal in NEET paper leak case

NEET paper leak case: A day after arresting two from Patna in the NEET-UG paper leak case, the CBI arrested a school principal and vice-principal in Jharkhand

Mr. Mehta informs the court that question papers and OMR sheets are sealed in non-tearable plastic covers. There is a seven-layered security in place, he says. 

Addressing the NTA’s submission, the CJI asks how city coordinators took both the wrong and right question papers from the SBI and Canara Banks. 

In response, Mr. Mehta says that there was a lacuna. 

“NTA should have informed Canara Bank not to give the wrong paper and the SBI to give the paper in its custody”, he adds. 

NTA admits that 3307 candidates attempted the wrong question paper in eight exam centres which was stored in Canara Bank. The answer key of Canara Bank was uploaded on July 3. 

Mr. Mehta apprises the Court that the difficulty levels of both the question papers (the right one which was kept in the SBI vaults and the wrong one which was kept in Canara Bank strong rooms) were the same. 

On the retest for 1563 candidates who were given compensatory marks for loss of time due to distribution of wrong question papers, Mr. Mehta says only 813 out of 1563 appeared. 

“The court had given them a choice to either appear for the retest or retain their original results minus the compensatory marks. The rest had decided not to take the gamble of the retest”, he adds. 

CJI remarks that over 4.2 lakh students had chosen option 2 in the Physics question.

The discussion is on whether they would lose four marks and get an extra negative mark, totalling a loss of five marks.

Grace marks were given to those who chose option two. 44 students got perfect scores due to the grace marks. 

Mr. Hooda however intervenes and says that the NTA’s reference points for its data keep shifting. 

“Sometimes it is 1.08 lakh, sometimes it is 56000 seats, sometimes it is 164 marks and other times it is 622 marks. They change the reference points to normalise the flaws. This will not do...”, he asserts. 

Mr. Mehta says the NTA is responding to the petitioners’ statistical arguments. 

Referring to allegations of malpractices in Hazaribagh Jharkhand, Mr. Mehta points out that there has been a “proportionate increase” in the number of candidates. 

“1569 candidates appeared in 2022, 1963 in 2023, and 27033 in 2024”, he says. 

He adds that the success ratio is only 4.61, so they were not going to Hazaribagh to “get some undue benefit, otherwise success ratio would have jumped”. He also points out that for government seats the success ratio in Hazaribagh is only 2.1% without counting the reservation. 

Also Read: ​​​Six arrested in Jharkhand in NEET case; Sanjeev Mukhiya kingpin, says Economic Offences Unit​​​

​​​

Six arrested in Jharkhand in NEET case; Sanjeev Mukhiya kingpin, says Economic Offences Unit

Bihar Police arrests six in NEET paper leak case, tracing connections to Jharkhand; kingpin Sanjeev Mukhiya still at large.

Debunking claims of cluster toppers in certain centres, Mr. Mehta tells SC that out of 14000 students who sought transfers and were granted, their success rate is only 6.47%. 

Perusing the evidence on record, the CJI notes, “33 students came to Hazaribagh, 37 came to Patna, 24 came to Godhra. Out of 33 who appeared from Hazaribagh, only one candidate scored above 622 marks.”

The court is further apprised that there has been no marked spike in any of the cities which are coaching hubs. 

Mr. Mehta says that it is not for the NTA to ask why a student wants to change her centre to another city and that it could be for “personal reasons”. 

To this, CJI Chandrachud asks – “But when students ask for a change of city, do you ask for reasons or documentation?”

Mr. Mehta responds, “We respect their choice. We don’t sit in appeal over their choices.” He further explains that a change may be sought on account of parents’ transfer or the students may be in a coaching centre there. Mere change to another city does not mean the exam is skewed, or that there is a cross-country flaw, he adds. 

Mr. Mehta counters petitioners’ claim that the markings and success rate in Karnataka’s Belgavi is high, so much so that a student who failed her 12th exam in Gujarat opted Belgavi as her exam centre. 

The success rate in Belgavi was only 2.05% in 2024, the NTA tells the court. 

CJI asks about the success rate in Hazaribagh, Jharkhand where a paper leak was alleged to have occurred. 

Mr. Mehta says that in Hazaribagh, the success rates have been 7.2 in 2022, 6.06 in 2023 and 4.61 in 2024. 

Also Read: ​​CBI questions Jharkhand school principal and bank officials in NEET case​​

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submits data to show that there has been no considerable increase in the success rate this year. 

• In Sikar, the success rate for 2023 was 19.19% and 19.22% in 2024.
• In Namakkal, it was 14.78% in 2023 and 16.98% in 2024.
• In Kota, it was 13.1% last year and only 12% this time.
• In Kottayam, it was 9.62% in 2023 and 11.03% in 2024.
• In Rajkot, the success rate was 12.6% in 2023 and 10.77% in 2024.

Mr. Mehta points out that Kottayam, Sikar, Namakkal, and Kota appear among the top 10 cities in NTA’s city-wise success rate table for NEET-UG 2204 for the first 1.08 lakh seats. 

Dismissing the argument of petitioners that there are clusters of toppers in certain centres, Mr. Mehta says – “NEET coaching centre hubs like Kottayam, Namakkal, Kota, Rajkot are sui generis. They are hotspots for competitive exams. Students come from outside to train here. their economy is based on coaching. Dummy question papers are given to students there every alternative day. They are trained. By the time they actually sit for NEET, it would be hypothetically their 201st question paper. But still, there is no alarming rise in the number of high scorers. The petitioners’ argument that there are clusters of toppers from these places may not hold water”. 

• Gujarat [Bhavnagar]: 5800(number of students who appeared) 4660 (number of students who got 164 marks or more) 80.34% (success ratio).
• Andhra Pradesh [Vijayawada]: 14493 (number of students who appeared), 11575 (number of students who got 164 marks or more), 79.87% (success ratio).
• Rajasthan [Sikar]: 27216 (number of students who appeared), 21574 (number of students who got 164 marks or more), 79.27% (success ratio).
• GUJARAT [Rajkot]: 7159 (number of students who appeared), 5604 (number of students who got 164 marks or more), 78.28% (success ratio).
• Andhra Pradesh [Tanuku]: 1007 (number of students who appeared), 782 (number of students who got 164 marks or more), 77.66% (success ratio).
• Chhattisgarh’s [Narayanpur] is the lowest at 186 (number of students who appeared), 15 number of students who got 164 marks or more), 8.06% (success ratio).
• Total in 569 cities: 2333162 (number who appeared in NEET-UG 2024), 1165723 (number who got 164 marks or more), 49.96% (success ratio).

Mr. Mehta apprises the court – “The ‘qualifying marks’ is a figure which is arrived at after the declaration of results and this would be a figure which is in the middle of the number of students who appeared i.e. 2333297 [i.e. 50 percentile]. In the present case, the computer-generated 50 percentile i.e. the qualifying marks came to be 164 marks(for the unreserved category) out of a total of 720 marks. In other words, students getting above 164 marks would be eligible to be admitted in 108000 seats. The candidates getting less than 164 marks will not be eligible to get admission in 108000 seats.” 

The Solicitor General explains that the purpose of providing for this percentile is to ensure that there is no attempt by private colleges to give admission to students who are not even qualified or eligible [i.e. who are getting below 164 marks] under the payment scheme or otherwise. I

“It is pertinent to point out that the qualifying marks for the previous year (2023) were only 137 marks, which is significantly lower than the present year. Thus, the overall result of all candidates has been much higher in 2024. This year number of students increased and this batch of 24 lakh students was more hardworking and the syllabus was sliced down”, Mr. Mehta underscores. 

NTA statistics in court:

• The total number of candidates who appeared is 23,33,162.
• The cut-off mark of candidates whose rank is within 108000 is 577 which corresponds to a success rate of 4.6%.
• The cut-off mark of candidates whose rank is within 56,000 is 622 which corresponds to a success rate of 2.4%.
• The total number of seats available in medical colleges is about 1,08,000 out of these 56,000 are in government colleges and 52,000 are in private colleges.

CJI: In the top 100, are there any students from Hazaribagh? (the leaks were detected there)

Mr. Hooda, appearing for the petitioners, intervenes and says that in centres in Sawai Madhopur students were given question papers with the wrong medium. Students who had opted for Hindi medium question papers were given English ones. The question papers were withdrawn midway and these students were given Hindi question papers. The exams were held all over again for 3.2 hours. 

“So the question papers in the wrong medium were with the students for several hours. In Sawai Madhopur, 120 students were given the wrong medium papers. The mistake was discovered through social media”, he adds. 

Mr. Hooda alleges the same thing happened in Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta says that he will address any proof that the petitioners were able to place in court to back their claim for a re-test and compare it with NTA’s evidence. 

CJI clarifies that the SC will not look at individual grievances connected with NEET. Such petitioners can move the respective High Courts. 

CJI tells Solicitor General, who is to commence his reply to the petitioners’ push for re-test, the parameters he has to cover:

One, whether the paper leak affected nationwide

Two, whether segregation of wrongdoers from the innocents among the 23 lakh students who appeared in NEET-UG 2024 is possible. 

Three, whether there are any systemic flaws in the conduct of NEET-UG 2024 that a complete re-test is warranted. 

The NEET question under the lens deals with two statements about the nature of atoms.

The first statement is “atoms are electrically neutral as they contain equal number of positive and negative charges”. The second is “atoms of each element are stable and emit their characteristic spectrum”. The students were given four options on the correctness of the two statements.

Over 4.20 lakh students went for the second option, which was correct according to an old version of the standard National Council of Education Research and Training (NCERT) textbook, while 9.28 lakh students chose the fourth option as their answer, which is right according to the new edition of the NCERT textbook.

The CJI says that the expert panel opined that option 2 is incorrect because atoms of radioactive elements are not stable.

“The NTA is correct in concluding that option 4 is correct”, he says. 

CJI Chandrachud says that the Court has received the report from the panel of experts constituted by IIT Delhi. 

“We have received the IIT Delhi Report. The director Prof Banerjee constituted a committee from the Department of Physics. They say a team of three experts examined the question. They say option 4 is the correct answer.” 

The Bench has assembled. The hearing has begun. 

Mr. Hooda on Monday contended that the paper leak happened before May 3 contrary to the Centre’s submission that the leak took place on the morning of May 5. 

“We have submitted a note on the basis of data. They admit paper leak, they admit dissemination happened on WhatsApp. Bihar police materials indicate that students were given leaked papers on 4th. Leak did not happen on the morning of May 5 as was suggested... my submission is that leak happened before May 3”, he said. 

Also Read: NEET-UG paper leak case: CBI arrests ‘mastermind’, two members of ‘solver gang’ in NEET-UG paper leak case

NEET-UG paper leak case: CBI arrests ‘mastermind’, two members of ‘solver gang’ in NEET-UG paper leak case

NEET-UG paper leak case: CBI arrests mastermind and two MBBS students in NEET-UG paper leak case, bringing total arrests to 21.

In the last hearing, the Bench stressed that the petitioners would have to produce more evidence to show the paper leak was widespread in order for a re-test to be conducted. 

“Are you challenging the results of this NEET or are you supporting people who do not want NEET at all... You have to show us there is a systemic failure which has destroyed the sanctity of the exam”, the CJI told the petitioners. He asked how the petitioners would establish that incidents in Hazaribagh, etc, have spread across the country to show that it is a systemic failure.

On Monday, the CJI posed tough questions to the NTA regarding the wrong paper distribution is some centres. 

1. In how many centres were the wrong question papers (Canara Bank) distributed?

2. How many students were evaluated on the basis of the Canara Bank paper?

3. Why was the Canara Bank paper’s answer key not declared? 

4. Who issues the authorisation to city coordinators to get which question paper? 

5. Why did city coordinators in places like Jhajjar go to both the State Bank of India and the Canara Bank to collect the papers?

6. Why did the Canara Bank give the wrong question paper to the city coordinator? Did the NTA not inform Canara Bank and SBI which of them held the right question paper?

7. Why did the Jhajjar city coordinator take back the Canara Bank question paper from only two centres and not the third and final one?

Senior advocate Narendra Hooda representing the petitioners questioned the ‘excellent’ results of Sikar students. He pointed out that out of 50 centres which have students with over 650 marks, 38 are in Sikar. 

He also referred to the unusual “travels” of NEET aspirants from places like Godhra to exam centres at Belgaum in Karnataka. A student got 705 marks when she had barely scraped through her class 12 board exams, he said. 

Sixty-one students scored a perfect 720/720 in the undergraduate National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET-UG) 2024 due to a significant reduction in syllabus, the National Testing Agency (NTA) explained to the Supreme Court.

“The most prominent factor in 61 candidates scoring 720/720 is due to the reduction in the syllabus, which was down to enable candidates to focus on the core concepts and to alleviate pressure on students who faced challenges in completing their studies due to the pandemic in 2019-20,” the NTA said.

Read more here. 

‘Reduced’ syllabus a big factor for perfect NEET scores: NTA

NTA explains how 61 students scored perfect in NEET-UG 2024 due to reduced syllabus and increased candidates.

The Centre in the Supreme Court said it is irrational to scrap the undergraduate National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET-UG) 2024 in its entirety.

The government further indicated that cancelling a pan-India exam would not be advisable in the “absence of any proof of any large scale breach of confidentiality”.

The government said a drastic move like a re-examination would jeopardise the future of lakhs of honest students who attended the NEET-UG 2024, which is under a cloud of controversy following allegations of widespread question paper leaks, impersonation, cheating and other irregularities.

Read more here. 

NEET-UG 2024: Scrapping exam not rational, says Centre to Supreme Court

Centre defends NEET-UG 2024 exam, opposes scrapping, citing potential harm to honest candidates, requests CBI probe into irregularities.

The proceedings on the NEET matter can be watched live here: 

​

An analysis of NEET-UG 2024 results shows that many students scoring high marks were clustered in particular centres located in certain cities or States. The National Testing Agency published the undergraduate medical entrance examination scores of 23,33,162 candidates on Saturday after the Supreme Court directed that the data be made public.

Of the 50 NEET-UG exam centres which had the highest percentage of candidates scoring above 650, 37 centres are located in Rajasthan’s Sikar district alone. A score of above 650 gives candidates a chance of getting admission in government medical colleges.

“Of the 30,204 students who bagged over 650 marks, and will compete for 20,000 highly coveted MBBS seats in government medical colleges, 2,037 bagged scores above 650 in Sikar alone. The CBI should definitely look at this anomaly,” said Krishan Sharma, the parent of an aggrieved candidate in Haryana. Dr. Sharma is one of the petitioners in the Supreme Court in the NEET-UG 2024 paper leak case.

Read more here. 

The Supreme Court on July 22 asked the Indian Institute of Technology-Delhi Director to assign three of its finest professors to solve a tricky and “ambiguous” question in the NEET-UG 2024 exam’s Physics paper within 24 hours and report back.

Their answer would impact the total marks of over four lakh candidates, including 44 students who scored perfect scores in the exam.

The order came at the end of a day-long hearing of petitions seeking a re-examination amidst allegations of question paper leaks and other irregularities, which have plagued NEET-UG 2024 and thrown a pall of shadow over the future of over 23 lakh students who appeared in the exam on May 5.

Read more here. 

Supreme Court asks IIT-Delhi to solve ‘ambiguous’ question from NEET-UG Physics paper

Supreme Court orders IIT-Delhi to resolve NEET-UG 2024 Physics question ambiguity impacting over 4 lakh candidates' marks.

Read The Hindu’s live coverage of the proceedings here. 

NEET-UG 2024 SC hearing highlights: SC asks IIT Delhi Director to form expert panel to review ambiguous physics question

NEET-UG 2024 hearing highlights: A re-test should be conducted at least for qualifying candidates, said Hedge. Follow live updates from The Hindu

Read The Hindu’s detailed explainer here. 

NEET-UG 2024 results controversy explained

NEET-UG 2024 results controversy: 1,563 candidates to retake exam due to grace marks issue, sparking protests and calls for re-test.

The ambiguity arises in the first part: that “atoms of each element are stable”. This is not always true because of the existence of isotopes, IIT Mandi assistant professor Nirmalya Kajuri said. An isotope of an atom has the same number of protons (and electrons) but a different number of neutrons. Many isotopes are unstable as a result; some isotopes are also more unstable than others.

Unstable atoms can undergo radioactive decay and turn into an isotope of a different element. One way to measure the extent of stability is by the amount of time required for the number of an element’s atoms to halve by radioactive decay, called the half-life.

Read more here. 

The problem with the physics question in the NEET-UG paper

Supreme Court asks IIT Delhi to review NEET-UG physics question for potential dual correct answers.