Delhi High Court Dismisses Petition Against NEET OMR Evaluation
Abid Khan's plea for recalculation rejected; court upholds National Testing Agency's OMR scanning process
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Abid Khan challenging the National Testing Agency's (NTA) evaluation of his NEET (UG) 2025 OMR sheet. Khan, who secured a 92.5368 percentile, claimed that his responses to five questions were not properly evaluated due to technical errors in the OMR sheet scanning process. He sought recalculation of his marks for questions 137 to 141 and demanded that a seat be reserved for him in a government medical college in Himachal Pradesh.
Presiding over the case, Justice Vikas Mahajan observed that Khan's failure to darken the circles completely as per the prescribed instructions resulted in the answers being treated as "unanswered." The court noted that the OMR scanner is impartial and applies uniform standards to all candidates, ensuring a transparent and non-arbitrary evaluation process.
The petitioner argued that the circles were clearly marked, but the computerized system failed to recognize them due to technical reasons. Despite availing the opportunity to challenge the recorded responses, Khan received no response from the NTA.
On behalf of the NTA, counsel Mr. Sanjay Khanna emphasized that the petitioner did not comply with the instructions to darken the circles fully, instead leaving spot marks that the scanner could not read. The court upheld the NTA's stance, highlighting that the instructions were clear and binding, and the OMR sheets were evaluated without human interference.
The court further clarified that the NEET (UG) 2025 Information Bulletin prohibits rechecking or re-evaluation of answer sheets due to their machine-gradable nature. The bulletin provides opportunities for candidates to challenge the answer key and OMR gradation, ensuring fairness in the evaluation process.
The ruling underscores the importance of adhering to examination guidelines, emphasizing that no mandamus can compel educational institutions to act contrary to their established procedures. The court referenced a similar decision in Sadhana Yadav v. Union of India, reinforcing the binding nature of the prospectus issued by institutions.
In light of the facts and circumstances, the court found no merit in Khan's petition and dismissed it, reiterating the transparency and impartiality of the OMR evaluation process.
Bottom Line:
NEET (UG) 2025 - Non-darkening of circles on OMR sheet as per prescribed instructions - Candidate's answers treated as "unanswered" due to failure to comply with instructions - No provision for rechecking/revaluation of machine-graded answer sheets.
Statutory provision(s): NEET (UG) 2025 Information Bulletin Clause 13.4
Abid Khan v. National Testing Agency, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2787002
