Solution to paper leaks is to generate it in last minute, PM keen to implement our report: Nandan Nilekani

Nandan Nilekani proposed replacing a fixed, preselected paper with a large bank of question papers. The final paper would be generated only shortly before that day’s exam. The idea matters because a known paper can be stolen, circulated, or sold before students sit the test.

Under this system, exam authorities would prepare many questions in advance but choose the actual paper at the last moment. Nilekani said there would be no single “A” question paper waiting to be leaked. He also agreed that AI could potentially generate papers on the examination day, although he did not present that as a detailed recommendation.

The proposal is part of wider examination reforms after criticism and student protests over leaks. Nilekani’s six-member task force has held about 18 panel meetings and 40 consultations. It received more than 50,000 suggestions. The committee’s report was due within three months, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi was described as keen to implement its recommendations.

Computer-based testing, or CBT, is an exam format in which students read questions and submit answers on computers. Instead of distributing identical printed papers and collecting paper answer sheets, an examination system delivers and records responses digitally. The article presents CBT as a way to modernize exam administration and address security concerns.

For example, students would travel to equipped centres with computers, internet connections, security systems, and supporting IT tools. Nilekani said the existing network of about 150,000 locations needs expansion. A digital system could also support last-minute paper generation, so students would not all depend on one preprinted paper prepared far in advance.

CBT is not automatically secure. The government would need stronger infrastructure and reliable centres, especially for students in remote or marginalized regions. A parliamentary committee called for more centres, including at least one in every district, to reduce travel and accommodation burdens. The task force is considering these systemic changes.

The article describes a very large existing testing network of about 150,000 locations. Nilekani said this network must be expanded to support computer-based testing. The scale matters because examination reform is not only about writing safer questions. It also requires enough secure, properly equipped places for students to take exams.

The task force also received more than 50,000 suggestions from many groups. These included students, parents, student bodies, doctors’ associations, the United Doctors Front, and examination organisations such as the NRA, SSC, RRB, and IBPS. Their input gives the committee a broad range of concerns to consider.

Since its constitution, the task force has held about 18 panel meetings and 40 consultative meetings. The article does not give a final network size or a completed implementation plan. It says Prime Minister Narendra Modi is keen to implement the committee’s suggestions, including stronger CBT infrastructure and wider access to testing centres.

A question paper generated only shortly before an exam would reduce the time available for someone to obtain and distribute it. It would also make an earlier stolen paper useless if it was not the paper eventually given to students. That could weaken the market for leaked papers, which Nilekani identified as a central concern.

For example, instead of preparing one known “A” paper, authorities could maintain a large bank and select the day’s paper at the last moment. A person who accessed an earlier draft would not necessarily know which questions would appear. The key mechanism is uncertainty about the final paper and a much shorter window for selling information.

This approach would not by itself solve every examination-security problem. The article also discusses secure centres, computer-based testing, infrastructure, and service providers. Nilekani said paper leaks are solvable when their root causes are examined systematically. The proposal is therefore one part of a broader reform plan, not a complete guarantee.

Outsourced and sub-contracted centres are considered risky because examination security depends on controlling facilities, technology, staff, and access. When private institutions are brought in through layers of contracting, responsibility and oversight can become harder to manage. The parliamentary committee specifically described such centres as a weak link in examination security.

For example, a private institution may provide the premises and equipment while another vendor manages the exam operation. More organisations may then be involved in handling students, systems, or examination materials. The article does not detail a particular breach caused by this arrangement, but it says the committee identified sub-contracted private centres as a security weakness.

The committee recommended that all centres be owned and operated by central or state governments. The article also notes that centres are currently leased to vendors. Any shift to CBT would require stronger security, IT tools, internet, and other facilities across the testing network.

The article points to two main alternatives to the present arrangement. Examination authorities could use more than one service provider instead of relying mainly on a single provider. They could also replace leased private centres with centres owned and operated by central or state governments. These changes are intended to improve transparency and security.

Representatives told the task force that changing the service provider could bring greater transparency in question-paper setting and test centres. Separately, the parliamentary committee said private institutions engaged through sub-contracts had often become a weak security link. Its recommendation was direct government ownership and operation of every centre.

The reform effort would also expand computer-based testing locations and strengthen their infrastructure. The article says this includes security, IT tools, internet, and other facilities. It does not name a final provider model or confirm that these alternatives have been adopted. Nilekani said Prime Minister Narendra Modi is keen to implement the task force’s eventual suggestions.

Controlling access to a fixed exam paper can create a profitable advantage. Someone who obtains it early may be able to sell its questions to students or intermediaries before the exam. The paper’s value comes from being known in advance while remaining unavailable to most candidates. That is the economic incentive Nilekani highlighted.

For example, if there is one clearly identified “A” paper, buyers know exactly what information they are purchasing. A leak can therefore be copied, circulated, or sold multiple times before the examination begins. Nilekani’s proposed question bank changes this calculation by making the final paper unknown until the last moment. An earlier paper may not be used at all.

The article frames this as a root cause that can be addressed systematically. It does not claim that last-minute generation would remove every security risk. Other concerns include testing-centre ownership, service providers, CBT infrastructure, internet access, and security systems. These issues are being considered by the high-powered task force.