Delhi High Court Upholds JEE Candidates' Dismissal Over Alleged Manipulation In Response Sheets, Asks Them To Do Community Service
The Delhi High Court has upheld dismissal of a petition filed by two students challenging the National Testing Agency's (NTA) findings regarding alleged manipulation of their JEE Mains, 2025, examination response sheets, while sparing them of costs but ordering them to do one-month community service instead.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela did not uphold the imposition of costs of Rs. 30,000 each on the students by the single judge, but restricted the penalty to an admonishment.
The Court directed the candidates to render community service at an old age home and child care centre respectively for a month.
The Bench dismissed the candidates' plea challenging a single judge order passed on September 22, 2025. They alleged irregularities in the conduct of JEE (Main), 2025. The single judge had observing that they failed to successfully establish their bona fides to prove their case.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court said that there was no infirmity in the single judge order which was based on a detailed appreciation of the forensic report submitted by National Cyber Forensic Laboratory (NFCL).
It added that the issues raised by the candidates pertained to disputed questions of fact and allegations of manipulation, which are not amenable to adjudication in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950.
The counsel appearing for the candidates submitted that they volunteered not to appear in the JEE examinations for the years 2025 and 2026.
The counsel representing NTA said that although the candidates had been barred from appearing in the JEE examinations for the years 2025 and 2026, there was no bar on them appearing in any other examinations.
Accordingly, the Court said:
“Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and considering that the appellants are young students who have recently completed their Class 12 board examinations, and so that their future is not adversely impacted, this Court, while upholding the impugned judgment in its entirety, deems it appropriate to clarify that the debarment shall not be treated as a stigma for their future academic pursuits.”
“In the facts of this case, instead of upholding the imposition of costs, this Court restricts the penalty to an admonishment,” it added.
Title: ANUSHA GUPTA & ANR v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY THROUGH THE DIRECTOR & OTHER
Counsel for Appellants: Ms. Abiha Zaida, Advocate along with appellants-in-person
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr. Sanjay Khanna, SC with Ms. Pragya Bhushan, Ms. Vilakshna Dayma, Mr. Akshat Chauhan, Ms. Anshu Kumari, Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. R. V. Prabhat and Mr. Naman, Advs. for NTA Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, CGSC with Ms. Usha Jamnal, Ms.Nyasa Sharma and Ms. Prajna Pandita, Advs. for UOI