In brief
The National Testing Agency (NTA), created in 2017 to bring order to India's sprawling exam landscape, has become a symbol of failure after a series of paper leaks, administrative errors and broader systemic failures. In 2026, a leaked NEET-UG paper forced more than two million students to retake the exam, leading to widespread protests and the resignation of the education minister. A new task force led by tech entrepreneur Nandan Nilekani has been tasked with recommending reforms, but experts warn that simply fixing the NTA will not solve deeper issues – from scarce university seats to the centralised, one‑time high‑stakes testing model that currently dominates Indian education. The debate now centers on moving to a fully digital, multi‑stage examination system, allowing students more chances and reducing the catastrophic impact of a single failed test.
In 2017 India launched the National Testing Agency (NTA) to bring transparency and consistency to its exams, hoping to replace a system plagued by paper leaks and cheating allegations.
Under the federal education ministry, the NTA soon handled the country’s most high‑profile tests – medical and engineering entrances, university admissions and research eligibility exams.
Fast forward eight years, and the organisation that was meant to inspire trust has become the source of the country’s greatest exam‑related crisis.
In June 2026, a leaked NEET‑UG paper forced more than two million students to retake the exam, sparking youth‑led protests and the resignation of the federal education minister.
The government’s response was to appoint a high‑level task force led by tech tycoon Nandan Nilekani to recommend reforms and restore confidence in the examination system.
Yet the issue is far larger than a single agency’s performance. Experts argue that the recurring problems expose fundamental flaws – from centralisation and exam design to the sheer volume of students competing for limited university places.
At the centre of the debate is whether India should pivot to computer‑based tests to eliminate paper leaks, improve efficiency and cut down on human involvement.
Some experts also see the need to restructure high‑stakes exams by introducing multiple test sessions and stages – a model already used for engineering entrance exams in the country.
Yes, reforms can reduce the risk of leaks, but they won’t change an education system where millions of students’ futures hinge on a single, centralised test.
Student activists and opposition politicians now argue for scrapping the NTA altogether, but most experts reject that as a panacea; they call instead for a deep‑rooted, statutory institution staffed by specialists committed to exam security and oversight.
In short, the urgency lies not just in preventing the next paper leak, but in redesigning the entire testing architecture to provide multiple, resilient assessment opportunities for every student.
