Quick Facts
- Parliamentary panel led by Digvijaya Singh tabled its 381st report seeking a full NTA reset.
- The panel called the CUET MCQ format ill-suited for humanities and JNU diversity goals.
- Government said observations are noted, UGC and NTA have been suitably advised on reforms.
In This Article
A parliamentary panel has pushed for a sweeping NTA reset and CUET review, asking for a foolproof exam system and a fresh look at the test that decides central university admissions.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports presented its 381st Action Taken Report to Rajya Sabha Chairman C P Radhakrishnan, the report said. The panel, headed by Rajya Sabha MP Digvijaya Singh, flagged repeated exam errors and raised concerns about CUET’s one-size-fits-all model.
Key Takeaways
- The panel wants the NTA to speed up the Radhakrishnan Committee reforms and adopt a foolproof exam protocol.
- It said MCQ-based CUET suits science better than humanities, where subjective thinking matters most for admissions.
- The committee recommended a nationwide blacklist of tainted exam vendors to stop them winning fresh contracts.
CampusFeed Take
The real signal here is not the criticism of the NTA, which is now routine, but the panel’s questioning of CUET itself as a universal admission test. CUET grew into India’s second largest exam with over 13 lakh applicants in 2025, yet the committee is asking whether one MCQ paper can serve a science aspirant and a humanities researcher equally. University owners and policy watchers should track the next parliamentary session closely, because any move toward subjective sections or institution-specific tests would reshape admission planning for the 2027 cycle. By Avinash.
What the Panel Recommended: Key Points
The 381st Action Taken Report builds on recommendations from the panel’s earlier 364th report on Demands for Grants for 2025-26, the report said. It covers the NTA (National Testing Agency), the CUET (Common University Entrance Test), and vendor accountability. The table below lists the core recommendations and the government’s reply.
| Area | Panel Recommendation |
|---|---|
| NTA reform | Expedite the Radhakrishnan Committee reforms and adopt a foolproof exam protocol |
| Exam mode | Explore pen-and-paper tests like UPSC and CBSE; limit CBT to government centres |
| CUET design | Review question quality and design to match NEP 2020 goals |
| Vendor control | Compile a nationwide list of blacklisted firms and linked persons |
| Transparency | NTA to submit a detailed annual report to Parliament |
The most striking point is the exam-mode shift. The panel asked the NTA to consider returning to pen-and-paper tests, used by UPSC and CBSE, after repeated computer-based test problems, the report said.
About the National Testing Agency
The NTA is an autonomous body under the Ministry of Education, set up in 2017 to conduct major entrance exams. It runs the JEE Main, NEET-UG, CUET, and several other national tests, reaching crores of candidates each year. The agency is now under close scrutiny after paper leaks, result delays, and answer key errors across its 2024 and 2025 cycles. Its official website is nta.ac.in.
Who Does the NTA Reset and CUET Review Apply To?
The NTA reset and CUET review touch every student who sits a national entrance exam through the agency. The panel endorsed Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s June 16, 2024 statement that a lot of improvement is needed in the NTA, the report said. It then asked the agency to move faster on the expert committee reforms.
“Multiple-choice question answers are particularly ill-suited for humanities and social sciences disciplines which are definitionally centred on independent, subjective thinking,” the committee said in its report.
The committee recommended a review of CUET question quality and design so the exam meets the purpose set out in NEP 2020. In its reply, the government said the observations were duly noted and that the UGC (University Grants Commission) and the NTA have been suitably advised. You can read the official position on the Ministry of Education site.
Why the Panel Flagged CUET Limits for JNU
CUET became India’s second largest exam within two years, drawing 13,54,699 applicants in 2025, the report said. Despite that scale, some members were not convinced a single MCQ test should be the universal admission method for undergraduate study. The panel used Jawaharlal Nehru University as its key example.
The report said JNU’s own test design was meant to help the university meet the socio-economic and regional diversity mandated by the JNU Act. The committee suggested CUET’s standard format may not protect that goal. The government replied that CUET offers a single application window, letting students apply once and appear in one exam for many universities.
What This Means For You
If you are a student
Nothing changes for your current CUET or NTA exam right now. The panel’s report is a recommendation, not a rule. Keep preparing as usual, but watch for any official notice on exam mode or design from the UGC and NTA over the coming months.
Turn Your Achievements Into Stories That Students Actually Read
Feature admissions, placements, rankings, events, research initiatives, achievements, and institutional milestones before a highly engaged education-focused audience.
If you are a parent
The panel’s push for a foolproof system aims to reduce paper leaks and result delays that cause real stress. No fee, date, or eligibility has changed. Track only the official UGC and NTA portals for updates, and avoid acting on unverified social media claims about CUET changes.
If you run a college or university
A possible CUET redesign or institution-specific testing could affect your admission planning. The JNU example shows the panel is open to diversity-led admission models. Map how your seat allotment and counselling would adapt if subjective sections or pen-and-paper modes return for some courses.
If you work in policy or media
The blacklist recommendation and the CUET design review are the two threads to follow. The government has only noted, not adopted, these points. The gap between recommendation and action will decide whether the 2027 cycle sees real change.
What Is Next
The ball now sits with the Ministry of Education, the UGC, and the NTA, who must decide how far to act on the panel’s advice. Key things to watch next:
- Any UGC or NTA notice on CUET design or exam mode
- A possible nationwide blacklist of tainted exam vendors
- The NTA’s first detailed annual report to Parliament
Do you think one common exam can fairly serve both science and humanities students?
Frequently Asked Questions
Last updated: June 17, 2026 at 11:30 IST
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and is based on publicly available information at the time of publishing. Exam dates, cutoffs, fees, deadlines, eligibility criteria, and scholarship details can change without notice. Always verify the latest information from the official portal of the relevant body (UGC, NTA, Ministry of Education) before taking any action. CampusFeed and its authors are not responsible for decisions made based on this article. This is not legal, financial, or career advice. Please consult a qualified professional for individual guidance.
Written by Avinash. Published: June 17, 2026. Updated: June 17, 2026. Have a tip or correction? Write to us at editorial@campusfeed.in.
