The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a NEET UG candidate seeking comparison of her original physical OMR answer sheet with the scanned one uploaded on the official portal, after she verified that the original OMR sheet produced by the NTA was indeed hers. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 330]

The candidate's primary issue was "whether the physical OMR sheet is identical to the digital OMR sheet which has been uploaded by respondents in the reference column of ERP or not". The counsel for the candidate in the last hearing submitted that if the physical OMR sheet was identical to the digital OMR sheet, there would be no issues left to argue on. 

Thus, division bench of Justice GS Ahluwalia and Justice Anuradha Shukla directed the Assistant Director of NTA to appear before the court along with the candidate's original OMR sheet in a sealed envelope. 

When the original OMR sheet was produced, the court asked the candidate to verify her signature appearing on the document. The candidate admitted that the signatures on the physical and uploaded OMR sheets were hers. 

Thus, the bench observed:

"Since the controversy with regard to the correctness of the OMR sheet uploaded by the respondents has been resolved by production of the original OMR sheet and verification of the same by the petitioner herself, therefore, nothing survives to be decided in this writ petition. Accordingly, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed". 

According to the petition, the candidate had secured more than 449 marks in the 2025 examination and had appeared in the 2026 examination with the expectation of improving her score. However, on July 13, 2026, upon checking the OMR answer sheet uploaded on the official portal, she allegedly noticed several serious discrepancies. 

The petitioner claimed that the roll number reflected on the uploaded OMR sheet was incorrect and that the booklet number was also different. She further alleged that several answers shown on the uploaded OMR sheet did not correspond with the answers actually marked by her in the examination. 

She thereafter approached the NTA and communicated the alleged discrepancies but claimed that no response was received. Thereafter, on July 16, 2026, the NTA declared the result in which the petitioner was awarded 292 marks.

The petition stated that despite the alleged discrepancies in the uploaded OMR sheet, the NTA failed to take effective action. Therefore, she was compelled to issue a legal notice seeking production of her original OMR sheet. 

Case Title: Anvi Rajoriya v National Testing Agency, WP-30009-2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 330

For Petitioner: Advocate Siddharth Sijoria

For Union: Deputy Solicitor General Praveen Kumar Newaskar

Click here to read/download the Order