The High Court asked the National Testing Agency (NTA) to respond to a plea by a NEET candidate who received a torn OMR sheet during the exam. The candidate’s petition highlights the unfair disadvantage faced due to the damaged answer sheet. The court’s inquiry seeks to address potential lapses in exam administration. The NTA’s stance will be crucial in determining any remedial action for the candidate.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court requested the National Testing Agency (NTA) to provide its stance on a plea filed by a 19-year-old NEET aspirant who seeking grace marks due to receiving a torn OMR sheet.
Justice C Hari Shankar summoned both the NTA and the Centre to respond to the petitioner’s plea and ordered the preservation of her original OMR sheet.
Read Also: Medical Education | Supreme Court Grants NEET Eligibility to Open School Students
An OMR sheet, utilized in exams, a pre-printed paper document with security features and includes personal details of the candidate such as their name and date of birth.
The court’s directive, issued on May 20, instructed,
“A list to be prepared for disposal on July 8, 2024. Additionally, respondents are ordered to maintain the original OMR sheets pertaining to the petitioner in this matter.”
According to the details provided, the petitioner, represented by advocate Tanvi Dubey, encountered issues during the NEET UG-2024 examination on May 5.
The petitioner asserted,
“The seal cover, the initial page of the physics segment of the question paper, and the OMR (Optical Mark Recognition) sheet were torn vertically.”
The petitioner provided with a new question paper and OMR sheet after a delay of approximately 30 minutes. However, she was only given an additional 10 minutes to complete the examination. The petition alleges that the National Testing Agency’s (NTA) conduct caused the petitioner’s performance to suffer, as she was denied a fresh OMR sheet for around 30 minutes and was ultimately provided with a new question paper and OMR sheet after an “unreasonable delay.”
The petitioner claimed that she had already attempted 60 questions in the old question paper and unable to properly attempt all questions in the new question paper with her full focus and concentration due to the time constraint.
The petition stated,
“The Petitioner has suffered significant prejudice due to the actions of Respondent No.1, as she was not treated equally with other candidates following the incidents within the examination hall. She was deprived of the opportunity to complete the paper under the same conditions as other examinees due to the tearing of her OMR sheet,”
The plea urged the court,
“In view of the aforementioned circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly issue a writ of declaration or any appropriate writ, order, or directive instructing Respondent No.1 to award grace marks to the Petitioner,”
The court’s intervention seeks to ensure that the NTA addresses the candidate’s issue promptly and transparently, potentially setting a precedent for how similar cases handled in the future.