"India's shift from sustained academic performance to multiple entrance examinations has deepened inequity and distress among the youth." Critically examine, and suggest reforms.

Admission in India once depended mainly on board and degree results. Today students face a cascade of entrance tests: JEE, NEET, CLAT and CUET after school, then GATE, CAT and CUET-PG after graduation. The statement is largely valid. However, the deeper cause is the shortage of good seats, not testing itself.

How the shift deepens inequity and distress

• Coaching premium: Stacked tests reward families who can pay for coaching and repeated attempts. This disadvantages rural, low-income and first-generation learners. The coaching industry grew large enough that the Centre issued guidelines for coaching centres on 16 January 2024 [4].
• Mental-health toll: The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education (2025) recorded fraud, suicides, drug abuse and mental-health struggles in coaching centres [5].
• Integrity failures: One agency, the NTA, conducts NEET, JEE and CUET [1]. A single breach therefore hits lakhs of students, as the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination showed [8].

The other side

• Common yardstick: School boards differ in syllabus and marking. A single test places all students on one scale.
• State response: The Public Examinations Act, 2024 sets 5–10 years' jail and a minimum ₹1 crore fine for organised malpractice [2]. It keeps candidates outside its criminal provisions [1]. Jharkhand's 2025 Act requires coaching centres to have certified counsellors [6].
• Real limit is seats: While affordable, quality seats remain scarce, any selection method must reject most applicants. Relying on board marks alone would simply move the pressure to Class 12.

Reforms

• Prevent breaches, not only punish them: Act on the Radhakrishnan Committee's remit on data security and NTA's structure [3], and publish yearly progress.
• Blend the two measures: Give fixed, published weight to board or degree performance alongside test scores.
• Make coaching rules uniform: Bihar has regulated coaching since 2010 [7], yet problems persist. States should turn the 2024 guidelines into law, including the ban on batch segregation [4].
• Expand supply: Education is on the Concurrent List, so the Centre and States should jointly raise the Gross Enrolment Ratio (share of college-age youth enrolled) at affordable, quality institutions.

Exam overload is a symptom of seat scarcity and weak institutions, made worse by an unregulated coaching market. Secure testing, weight for sustained performance and more quality seats can restore fairness. This would honour the equality of opportunity guaranteed by Article 14 and advance SDG 4.