Back
Students' NEET Dreams Derailed by Fraud, But Court Draws Hard Line on Deadlines
In a stern ruling that underscores the unyielding nature of competitive exam schedules, the dismissed a writ petition by students from Oxford Junior College, Guntur. Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Ninala Jayasurya refused to direct the to reopen the NEET UG 2026 application portal or allow alternate submissions, prioritizing the exam's sanctity over individual hardships.
From Trust to Turmoil: The College Clerk's Betrayal
The saga began with rural students, many from farming families, relying on a college computer operator named Mr. Murthy to handle their NEET UG 2026, JEE Mains, and EAPCET applications. Oxford Junior College (formerly Lakshya Junior College), affiliated with the , provided coaching for these exams. Parents paid fees, trusting Murthy's track record from prior years.
Disaster struck on April 8, 2026, when some JEE aspirants received fake hall tickets and were barred from centers. Investigations revealed Murthy had pocketed fees without submitting forms, prompting a police complaint (Crime No. 198/2026) against him and college management. Petitioners, led by Mahesh Gaddam, realized too late—on April 8-9—that their NEET applications, due by the extended March 11 deadline, were also missing. Representations to NTA on April 18 went unanswered, leading to the May 29 writ petition filed just days before the May 3 exam.
Petitioners' Cry for Mercy: 'We're Innocent Victims'
Counsel Ms. G. Mounika argued these
"innocent students from rural backgrounds"
bore no fault, having handed over details and fees to a trusted aide. Allowing late entry via a special window or alternate mode wouldn't prejudice others, they urged, emphasizing the fraud's late discovery and the Board of Intermediate Education's plea for extension.
NTA's Iron Wall: Process Over Pity
Represented by Central Government Counsel, NTA countered with ironclad facts: Applications opened February 8, extended to March 11 (9 PM submission, 11:50 PM payment). Public notices and the information bulletin mandated online-only submissions via neet.nta.nic.in, warning of disqualification for non-compliance. No confirmation pages were sought by students over 33 days, and even post-fraud revelation, action lagged until April 18.
With 2.28 million candidates across 5,446 centers in 566 cities (including abroad), admit cards issued April 26, and secure logistics underway, reopening risked chaos. NTA noted rejecting similar pleas from 1,757 others to uphold uniformity.
Bench's Balancing Act: Precedents Seal the Fate
The court meticulously parsed the record, acknowledging the fraud but holding students accountable for not verifying submissions. Drawing from 's Rahul Prabhakar v. Punjab Technical University (1997), it reaffirmed strict adherence to advertised timelines under . 's State of Tamil Nadu v. G. Hemalathaa (2019) shut down humanitarian overrides, cautioning against impinging exam integrity.
"Timelines stipulated in advertisement/public notice/information bulletin must be strictly adhered to and no modification therein is called for by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under ."
The bench rejected any interference, as petitioners offered no compelling grounds.
Echoes in Media: Upholding 'Sanctity' Amid Heartbreak
As reported in initial coverage, the decision aligns with NTA's stance against similar pleas, reinforcing that
"timelines...must be strictly adhered to wherein interference cannot be made on humanitarian grounds."
This leaves affected students to pursue remedies against the fraudsters.
Final Verdict: Petition Dismissed, No Costs
"This writ petition is dismissed being devoid of any merit. No costs."
The order protects the mega-exam's flow but spotlights vulnerabilities in coaching ecosystems. Future aspirants may now double-check submissions, while colleges face scrutiny over staff integrity. For these petitioners, NEET 2026 slips away, a harsh lesson in self-reliance.
