NEET Re-Exam: Candidate Moves MP High Court Over 241-Mark Discrepancy In Result; Challenges Constitutional Validity Of NTA

A division bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar and Justice Alok Awasthi granted time to Union of India, represented by ASG Romesh Dave, to seek instructions and file a response.

"Shri Dave seeks a week's time to seek instructions in the matter and to file short reply. List on 28.07.2026."

The petitioner, Lokendra Singh Khadiya, has challenged the action of the NTA in declaring his NEET (UG)-2026 re-exam result and has also questioned the constitutional validity of the agency's registration and functioning as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.

According to the petition, Khadiya appeared in the NEET-UG re-examination held on June 21, 2026. On July 14, 2026, while downloading his OMR response sheet from the official NTA portal, he allegedly first received a response sheet in which the entire Physics and Chemistry sections were shown as blank. However, after logging in again, he was able to access another OMR sheet containing his recorded responses.

The petitioner has contended that the availability of two different OMR response sheets on the official portal indicates a serious technical discrepancy in NTA's evaluation system.

The petition states that, after comparing the second OMR response sheet with the official answer key, the petitioner calculated his score to be 305 marks. However, when the result was declared on July 16, 2026, he was awarded only 64 marks, resulting in a discrepancy of 241 marks.

Claiming that the discrepancy points to an error in the processing of OMR data, evaluation software, computation of marks, or preparation of the scorecard, the petitioner has sought directions for verification of his OMR response sheet, the evaluation process, and the computation of marks based on NTA's official records, along with consequential correction of his result.

Apart from seeking correction of his result, the petitioner has also challenged the validity of NTA's registration under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, arguing that the agency lacks statutory authority to conduct national entrance examinations such as NEET. He has sought a declaration that the registration and functioning of the NTA, to the extent it performs sovereign governmental functions, is unconstitutional.

The petitioner has further sought interim permission to participate provisionally in the NEET-UG 2026 counselling process pending adjudication of the writ petition.