The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal by a NEET-UG 2025 candidate seeking recalculation of his OMR responses and revision of his result and rank. The bench, led by Justice Vikas Mahajan, concluded that there was no arbitrariness or unfair treatment in the evaluation process employed by the National Testing Agency (NTA). The petitioner, Abid Khan, had claimed that his responses to five questions were correctly marked but not reflected in his score. He asserted that the NTA failed to consider these answers, thereby affecting his merit in the ST category list for admission to Government Medical College, Himachal Pradesh.
The Court observed that the OMR sheets of all candidates were evaluated by automated scanners without human intervention, ensuring uniform treatment. The process, it noted, applied the same standards across the board. As per the NTA’s submissions, Khan was awarded marks for one of the questioned responses. For the remaining four, the Court found that the marks were not given because the circles were not properly darkened in the manner required by the instructions. The Court noted that Khan had used spot marks in two questions and failed to darken the complete circle in two others, making them indecipherable to the scanning software.
The judges stressed that the information bulletin for NEET-UG clearly stipulates that OMRs are machine-gradable and that there is no provision for rechecking or revaluation of answer sheets because the evaluation is handled by software. The Court underscored that candidates are required to adhere strictly to instructions, including the correct method of marking responses. Those instructions warn that any deviation may result in non-scanning of responses. Khan’s failure to follow the required method was a risk he assumed.
In rejecting the plea, the High Court held that the petitioner had not demonstrated any fault or inconsistency in the scanning or evaluation process by the NTA. No evidence of discrimination or arbitrariness was found. The Court emphasized that a student cannot override declared procedures by seeking retrospective intervention, particularly when the procedures are transparently documented and uniformly applied.
By dismissing the petition, the Court affirmed that the NEET evaluation mechanism is binding once established and properly disclosed, and that deviations from prescribed formats by candidates do not warrant judicial correction of scores.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.