MBBS aspirant alters OMR sheet to claim higher marks in NEET 2023, HC slaps fine

In an order dated August 11, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, presiding over a single-judge bench, stated, "It is noteworthy that the petitioner has deliberately attempted to manipulate the official record in the OMR sheet presented on her behalf. Such an effort cannot find acceptance within the confines of a court of law."

Justice Kaurav further expressed his inclination to impose substantial penalties on the petitioner and to involve the police in the case, but he abstained from taking such measures due to the petitioner's young age.

The high court's verdict was rendered in response to a plea filed by a medical aspirant hailing from Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner sought the intervention of the National Testing Agency (NTA) to present her authentic Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheet alongside the exam's answer key, reevaluate her scores, and release a revised outcome and merit list.

In addition, the petitioner requested guidance in securing an MBBS seat for the academic year of NEET (UG)-2023 within a government medical college situated in either Kerala or Andhra Pradesh.

As per the petitioner's submission, the NTA announced the examination results on June 13, indicating her all India rank for counseling as 351. She had garnered a total score of 697 out of 720, corresponding to a percentile of 99.9. She also claimed recognition of her rank by the Kerala State Medical Rank List-2023 and Dr YSR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada-08 NEET UG rank-wise list for the state of Andhra Pradesh.

According to the petitioner's submission, she was shocked during the registration process on the Medical Counselling Committee (MCC) website as she encountered an issue that prevented her from advancing to the subsequent registration step. The petitioner asserted that her overall marks were arbitrarily lowered to 103, leading to a significant downgrade in her rank to 12,530,32, accompanied by a percentile of 38.4.

Subsequently, in response to this matter, she lodged a complaint with the relevant authorities. However, finding no resolution forthcoming, she decided to pursue legal recourse by approaching the court.

However, the NTA contested the petitioner's claims, alleging that the OMR sheet she relied upon had been tampered with and altered. The agency stated that the petitioner's responses on the OMR sheet were "intentionally altered and modified to attempt claiming higher marks in the examination."

During the court proceedings, the NTA's counsel presented the original OMR sheet to the court. Despite examining the original document, both the petitioner and her counsel persisted in asserting that it was not the authentic sheet.

The counsel for NTA further informed the court that the petitioner's name was absent from the merit list. However, the petitioner disputed this assertion, maintaining that her name had indeed been present in an earlier version of the list but had subsequently been removed.

Examining the issue, the court said there was no reason to believe that the NTA would “fabricate or replace” the marks obtained by any of the candidates and the agency had no personal stake. It said;

“This court is shocked with the approach of the petitioner. Respondent no 2, NTA, which is a government agency conducts examination where lakhs of candidates appear. In the current year of 2023, more than 20 lakh candidates appeared. The specific submissions have been made by NTA in its counter affidavit and the original OMR sheet has also been presented. The record produced by the respondents is the official record. There is no reason to doubt the genuineness of the same.”

After comparing both the OMR sheets, the high court said;

“It is to be noted that in the OMR sheet relied upon on behalf of the petitioner, a deliberate attempt has been made by the petitioner to manipulate the official record. Such an attempt cannot be tolerated in court of law”.

Subsequently, the court imposed Rs 20,000 as costs on the woman, making it clear that such an attempt cannot be tolerated in court of law. It disposed of the plea and noted;

“Having perused the entire material available on record and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this court intended to impose costs of Rs 2,00,000/- against the petitioner and also to send the matter for investigation to the police. However, keeping in mind the tender age of the petitioner and various circumstances such as the pressure of parents and peers, this court refrains from taking such a view and instead imposes costs of Rs 20,000/- against the petitioner.”

To view the original order, click on the link below:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/163521878/