Power cuts hit parts of Indore and Ujjain while lakhs of aspirants sat the NEET UG 2025 paper on May 4. Some rooms went dim or dark; students say they filled OMR bubbles by candle or mobile light and got no extra time. Those who felt badly hit went to the Madhya Pradesh High Court, setting up the Re-NEET UG 2025 MP High Court case that has since moved through appeals and could now reach the Supreme Court.
Quick Snapshot
| Item | Fact |
| Exam | NEET UG 2025 (May 4) |
| Issue | Power outage, poor lighting at some Indore & Ujjain centres |
| Petitioners | About 70-75 (roughly 200 initial complaints reported) |
| Single Bench (Justice Subodh Abhyankar) | Ordered limited retest for petitioners who approached before June 3 |
| Order timeline | Pronounced June 23; written / reported around June 30-July 1 |
| Marks rule (then) | Only retest scores to count for those candidates |
| Counselling | Could proceed; admissions for affected to hinge on retest |
| Appeal | Division Bench stayed, then set aside the retest order (order dated July 14, reported July 15) |
| Present position | No retest scheduled; petitioners seeking relief in Supreme Court |
What Happened on Exam Day (NEET 2025 power outage MP court decision context)
Afternoon storms reportedly tripped electricity at multiple centres. Candidates alleged long low-light stretches, uneven natural light between rooms, and late arrival of candles or backup lamps. Complaints surfaced from centres such as ILVA Higher Secondary School, Shri Vaishnav Academy, Madhav College, and Government New Law College; additional Ujjain locations were also mentioned. Students argued the blackout hurt concentration in a high-stakes test and that no compensatory time was given.
How the Case Reached Court
Families first raised the matter locally and with the NTA. Media coverage followed. Ultimately, a group of roughly 70-75 candidates (out of about 200 who voiced issues) filed writ petitions in the Indore Bench of the MP High Court. They said unequal conditions violated Article 14, which protects equality before law; some rooms had light, others sat semi-dark. Several petitions were clubbed.
The MP HC Re-NEET Order 75 Students: Relief, But Narrow
After hearings in which the judge reportedly dimmed courtroom lights to grasp the complaint, Justice Subodh Abhyankar held that affected candidates were disadvantaged through no fault of their own. He directed the NTA to conduct a NEET UG retest 2025 MP HC limited to those who filed petitions before June 3 (linked to the answer key window). He further said only retest marks should be used to prepare ranks for these candidates and that counselling for them would depend on the retest outcome.
NTA’s Position
The NTA, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, disputed the extent of harm. Officials said alternative lighting (inverters, emergency lamps, candles, torches) was used; some outages were brief; and statistical analysis showed no serious performance drop at the flagged centres. Media reports noted that several high scorers, including 600+ marks, came from centres named in petitions.
Division Bench Appeal: Stay, Then Set Aside
NTA appealed. A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Rusia and Binod Kumar Dwivedi first stayed the single bench order, then on July 14 (reported July 15) allowed the appeal and dismissed the petitions. The judges cited the expert data, the small number of petitioners (about 70 among 27,000+ local test takers), and national comparability concerns. They also asked authorities to strengthen future power backup planning for large exams.
Current Status
With the single bench directions quashed, no Re-NEET is scheduled. Original NEET UG 2025 scores stand for counselling unless a higher court changes things. Petitioners have approached the Supreme Court, which has agreed to list the matter; advocates flagged that all-India counselling opened July 21. Candidates should participate using their existing score while tracking court updates.
Reported Centres With Power Complaints
| City | Centre | What was reported |
| Indore | ILVA Higher Secondary School | 1-2 hr outage; candle / late backup claims |
| Indore | Shri Vaishnav Academy | Dim rooms; inadequate backup alleged |
| Indore | Madhav College | Uneven lighting; outage complaints |
| Indore | Government New Law College | Outage around 3:30 pm window cited in petition |
| Ujjain | Various (names varied) | Power fluctuations; low natural light |
What Should Affected Students Do Now
- Register and fill counselling choices on time; do not skip rounds waiting for a retest that is not ordered.
- Monitor Supreme Court listing and NTA / MCC notices daily.
- Keep documentation: admit card, centre name, seat number, affidavits, photos, complaint copies.
- If you believe your score is unrepresentative, plan a two-track strategy: apply with current rank while preparing evidence in case of legal relief.
- Lean on mentors and peers; performance anxiety after such events is normal and manageable.
Conclusion
The Re-NEET story shows how a local infrastructure failure can ripple through a national exam. One court tried to tailor equity for a small group; an appellate bench prioritised uniformity for the national pool. Now the Supreme Court may have the last word. Whatever happens, the episode underlines a simple exam-day truth: reliable power, lighting, and contingency plans are not luxuries. They are fairness and essentials.
FAQs
The single bench found petitioners from Indore and Ujjain faced power failures that created unequal conditions and violated fairness under Article 14, so it ordered a limited retest for those who filed by June 3.
Yes. It first stayed and then set aside the single bench ruling, so no retest is in force unless a higher court revives it.
Petitions and reports repeatedly named ILVA Higher Secondary School, Shri Vaishnav Academy, Madhav College, and Government New Law College in Indore; additional Ujjain centres also saw complaints. Lists vary and are unofficial.
That was the single bench plan. After the appeal succeeded, original NEET marks currently count. Any change now depends on higher court orders.
Relief was restricted to candidates who petitioned by June 3 (about 70-75). With the order quashed, no group has a sanctioned retest right now, but the Supreme Court case is pending.
