Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
Sabareesh Rajan - Petitioner
Versus
National Testing Agency & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No.12251 Of 2021, CM Appls. No.38335 Of 2021 & 23070 Of 2022, W.P.(C) 12268 Of 2021 & CM Appl. 23064 Of 2022, W.P.(C) No.12285 Of 2021 & Cm Appl. 23067 Of 2022, W.P.(C) No.12332 Of 2021 & CM Appl. No.23065 Of 2022
Decided On : 08-07-2022
OMR Sheets - National Eligibility Entrance Test (UG) - NEET 2020, NEET 2021 - The court discussed the controversy surrounding the OMR sheets used in the NEET 2020 and NEET 2021 examinations. The court analyzed the allegations of tampering and forgery of the OMR sheets by the respondents and the petitioners' contentions regarding the discrepancies between the original and uploaded OMR sheets. The court also considered the request for forensic examination of the OMR sheets and the petitioners' plea for admission into the MBBS course for the academic session 2022-23. The court ultimately dismissed the petitions, stating that the allegations were based on conjecture and surmises and that the relief sought could not be granted due to the academic session being already underway.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, aspirants of NEET 2020 and NEET 2021, alleged tampering and forgery of their OMR sheets by the respondents, seeking quashing of the results and admission into the MBBS course for the academic session 2022-23.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the controversy surrounding the OMR sheets gave rise to highly disputed facts, which could not be adjudicated without affording an opportunity to the parties to lead evidence. The court dismissed the petitions, stating that the allegations were based on conjecture and surmises and that the relief sought could not be granted due to the academic session being already underway.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the authenticity of the OMR sheets, the request for forensic examination, and the plea for admission into the MBBS course for the academic session 2022-23.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the allegations of forgery/fabrications could not be inferred without affording an opportunity to the parties to lead evidence. The court also emphasized that the relief sought could not be granted due to the academic session being already underway.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitions, stating that the allegations were based on conjecture and surmises and that the relief sought could not be granted due to the academic session being already underway.
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjeev Narula, J.) :
THE CONTROVERSY - OMR SHEETS
1. Petitioners are aspirants of National Eligibility Entrance Test (UG) [NEET 2020]. NEET Examination is conducted via pen and paper-based mode in Multiple Choice Questions (“MCQ”) format. The candidates are required to fill their responses to the questions by filling/shading the corresponding circle on Optical Mark Recognition (“OMR”) sheets – which is then used to digitally read answers/information. Apart from the responses, candidates are also required to fill in personal details and affix their signature and thumb impression for identification. These OMR sheets are provided to candidates at examination centre at the time of examination.
BRIEF FACTS
2. Since the grounds of challenge and reliefs urged in the present petitions are nearly identical, the same are being decided by way of a common order. Petitioners appeared in NEET 2020 held on 12th September, 2020, but were unable to secure admission on the basis of their scores. Contending that their OMR sheets have been tampered with, they moved the Supreme Court seeking quashing of the results. The Supreme Court, vide order dated 03rd December, 2020, declined to entertain Petitioners’ grievance and directed them to approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950.[In W.P.[C] 1255/2020 dated 3rd December, 2020]. Pursuant thereto, Petitioners filed a writ petition on 11th December, 2020 before this Court to challenge results of NEET 2020 Examination – which is pending adjudication before this Court.[W.P. (C) 10319/ 2020 titled Muskan Sabharwal & Ors v. National Testing Agency & Ors.].
3. In the meanwhile, Petitioners appeared for NEET 2021 Examination on 12th September, 2021. After the examination, Respondent No. 1 – National Testing Agency (“NTA”) published the scanned images of OMR sheets of all candidates, including those of the Petitioners, in accordance with Clause 13.1 of the Information Bulletin of NEET 2021, which reads as under:
13.1.1. After the conduct of the examination, NTA will display the scanned images of OMR Answer Sheets and recorded responses by the machine, of all candidates on the website (https://neet.nta.nic.in//). The exact date of display of scanned images of OMR Answer Sheets shall be communicated after the examination on the NTA website.
13.1.2 Applicants will be given an opportunity to submit representation against the OMR grading by paying a non-refundable processing fee of Rs. 200/- per question challenged.
13.1.3. Representations made by the candidates against the OMR grading will be verified by the NTA from the actual record and the same will be updated in the data if challenges are found to be correct. However, no intimation in this regard will be sent to an individual candidate.
13.1.4. Applicants are advised to visit the website https://neet.nta.nic.in// for viewing and downloading the image of the OMR Answer Sheet by the candidates.”
4. This time again, in respect of NEET 2021 Examination, Petitioners proclaim that their OMR sheets have been forged by Respondents, and those which have been uploaded on the website after the said examination are different to those originally submitted by them at the time of examination. Petitioners contend that they never marked the answers which are shown on the uploaded OMR sheets, as displayed on the website. They assert that the sheets are fake/ forged/ fabricated and that NTA, in connivance with Respondent No. 2 [Director General, NTA] and Respondent No. 3 [Joint Director, NTA], knowingly and dishonestly contributed/ acted towards the preparation of such OMR sheets. Petitioners and other candidates have deliberately been coerced towards filling their responses in the OMR sheets using only black and blue ball pens supplied by the Respondents, thereby enabling Respondents to subsequently forge/ fabricate the OMR sheets. The
The main legal point established in the judgment is that allegations of forgery/fabrications cannot be inferred without affording an opportunity to the parties to lead evidence, and relief sought can....
The unsubstantiated nature of beliefs and lack of evidence are insufficient to establish a valid cause of action in seeking reliefs through a writ petition.
Allegations of examination tampering must be substantiated with credible evidence to establish a legal cause of action for relief.
The Court held that the original OMR sheet produced by the 2nd respondent was the only one mark sheet of the petitioner and there was no discrepancy in the documents produced by the respondents.
Presumption in favor of the official record and the consequences of deliberate tampering with official documents.
Disputed questions of fact and elaborate evidence required for adjudication under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The submission of forged documents in examination processes can lead to legal action against the candidate, and petitions based on such submissions may be dismissed.
The court affirmed that the integrity of official examination records is paramount, and claims based on discrepancies without credible evidence are insufficient to challenge the results.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
