NEET-UG Candidate Moves Madhya Pradesh High Court Over 241-Mark Discrepancy, Challenges NTA's Constitutional Validity

A significant legal challenge has been mounted against the National Testing Agency (NTA) as a NEET-UG candidate has petitioned the Madhya Pradesh High Court, claiming a staggering 241-mark gap between the score he calculated using the official answer key and the result displayed on his scorecard. The petition goes a step further, directly questioning the constitutional validity of the NTA itself. A division bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar and Justice Alok Awasthi has now sought the Union of India's stand on the matter.

A Tale of Two Scorecards

The petition, filed by candidate Lokendra Singh Khadiya , stems from a deeply troubling personal experience with the combined NEET-UG examination. According to the plea, the petitioner meticulously matched his responses from the exam with the officially released OMR sheet and answer key. His self-assessment pointed to a specific score. However, when the National Testing Agency released the final results, his scorecard displayed a tally that was drastically lower—a difference of a massive 241 marks.

The core of the legal dispute lies in this fundamental mismatch. The petitioner’s legal team, led by counsel Shri Abhinav Dhanodkar , argues that such a stark error points to systemic failures in the examination and evaluation process, potentially affecting hundreds of other aspirants. The case underscores the high-stakes nature of India’s premier medical entrance exam, where even a single mark can alter a student's career trajectory.

The Legal Offensive: Challenging the NTA's Foundation

Beyond the individual mark discrepancy, the petition seeks a broader constitutional remedy. It challenges the very existence and functioning of the National Testing Agency, questioning its legislative and legal mandate to conduct examinations of such national importance. This elevates the case from a simple scoring correction to a foundational challenge against the country’s primary testing authority.

On July 21, 2026, when the matter was called for hearing, the bench recorded the petitioner's submissions. Representing the Union of India, Additional Solicitor General Shri Romesh Dave appeared before the court and requested additional time. The bench noted: "Shri Dave seeks a week's time to seek instructions in the matter and to file a short reply ." Consequently, the court granted the request, marking a procedural pause but setting the stage for a critical legal battle.

Awaiting the Centre's Stand

The matter has now been listed for hearing on July 28, 2026 , by which time the Union of India is expected to file a short reply detailing its position on both the mark discrepancy and the constitutional challenge to the NTA. The court’s directive for a response indicates that it views the petition as raising serious questions requiring a formal reply from the government.

The case is being watched closely by legal experts and lakhs of aspirants alike. A finding in favor of the petitioner could not only grant relief to Lokendra Singh Khadiya but could also open the floodgates for similar grievances and force a judicial review of the NTA’s operational and constitutional framework. For now, all eyes are on the Centre’s response as the High Court prepares to weigh in on a candidate’s fight for transparency against a formidable statutory body.