The Allahabad High Court has directed the National Testing Agency (NTA) to examine the OMR sheet of NEET (UG) 2025 candidate Akshita Singh, who claimed she mistakenly marked the wrong booklet series code during the examination.
The bench of Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava issued this order on July 9, 2025, in Writ-C No. 21098 of 2025: Akshita Singh v. Union of India & Others.
Background:
The petitioner, Akshita Singh, represented by Advocate Sudhanshu Pandey, appeared for NEET (UG) 2025 but marked booklet series number 46 on her OMR sheet, despite actually attempting questions from booklet series number 47.
As per the writ petition,
“As per the best knowledge of petitioner, she attempted maximum questions to be answered and with the tally of final Answer Key issued by the NTA, she will secure approximately 589 marks out of total 720 marks. The cut off marks for OBC category is (530-540) i.e. 143-113 percentile.”
However, due to the booklet code mismatch, she was awarded only 41 marks. The petitioner sought directions for rechecking of her OMR sheet and consideration of her candidature.
Respondents’ Stand:
Appearing for NTA, Advocate Fuzail Ahmad Ansari argued that the evaluation process was complete and there was no scope for interference. He informed the Court that answer keys and OMR sheets were uploaded on June 3, 2025, with the objection window open until June 5, 2025. The petitioner raised her grievance only on June 14, 2025.
Mr. Ansari submitted,
“There is at all no scope for interference.”
He relied on multiple judgments, including Telangana State Public Service Commission vs. Pothula Durga Bhavani, highlighting that mistakes like incorrect roll numbers or booklet codes are not minor. Citing a past judgment, he read:
“The error committed by the candidates cannot be said to be minor in nature. It is the Registration Number, Roll Number that determines identity of the candidates.”
He also invoked the Supreme Court’s caution in Ran Vijay Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2018) 2 SCC 357:
“Sympathy or compassion does not play any role in the matter of directing or not directing re-evaluation of an answer sheet.”
Court’s Analysis:
The Court took note of the unusual score difference — 41 marks recorded, but 589 marks claimed.
The bench observed,
“We appreciate it is a step taken to prevent unfair means. As a result of petitioner’s mistake in mentioning the booklet series code, her answer marks were recognized against a different series of the same questions. There is a wide gap between 41 and 589 marks.”
It further reasoned,
“Her mistake has caused omission to evaluate her merit. We see the mistake in that context. Furthermore, the candidate is all of 20 years old and had prepared herself, as other candidates did, to take the examination. To err is human and it happens, in spite of there being notices against commission of errors.”
The Court distinguished the petitioner’s case from others cited by the NTA, including G. Hemalatha and Vinay Kumar, noting that unlike cases where instructions were deliberately ignored, here the mistake was a clerical error:
“We have not been shown anything to even indicate that petitioner’s mistake was deliberate.”
It emphasized that the issue was not one of re-evaluation, stating:
“What the Supreme Court said in paragraphs 31 and 32 does not apply to this case because it is not a question of re-evaluation. Facts are, petitioner’s answers were never evaluated because of mistake in mentioning of test booklet code.”
Court’s Direction:
The bench ordered,
“We require respondent no.3 to assist us by examining petitioner’s OMR sheet corresponding to test booklet number 47 and give us a result on adjourned date.”
The Court clarified that if it finds Akshita’s answers would have placed her above the category cut-off, it will proceed to consider her candidature. Otherwise, the writ petition is likely to be dismissed.
The matter is now listed for further hearing on July 15, 2025, at 2:00 PM.
Case Title: Akshita Singh v. Union of India & Others
Case No.: Writ-C No. 21098 of 2025
