NEET Candidate Accuses OMR Tampering, Pursues Legal Action

Fast Summary

• A NEET candidate from Bengaluru, Spurthy S, has alleged manipulation in the OMR sheet displayed on the NTA website.
• Spurthy claims the OMR sheet does not reflect her marked answers during the examination and cites a discrepancy of 174 marks.
• She highlighted inconsistencies such as mismatched handwritten numbers and missing time written under her signature, which she says where instructed by the invigilator.
• The candidate wrote to NTA on June 3; however, NTA replied on June 12 asserting that the displayed OMR sheet is authentic and provided thru due process from her examination center.
• Spurthy argued that while her current rank is about 93,000 based on NTA’s evaluation, she believes it should have been around rank 200 considering her performance expectations and academic profile (625/625 in SSLC; 99% in II PU).
• Dissatisfied with NTA’s response, Spurthy plans to approach Karnataka High Court for legal recourse.

Indian Opinion Analysis
This incident raises broader concerns regarding transparency and procedural scrutiny in high-stakes examinations such as NEET conducted by national authorities like NTA. As one of India’s most competitive entrance tests determining access to medical education across the country, discrepancies-whether perceived or factual-can severely affect trust among candidates who devote significant effort preparing for these exams.

While technical robustness is emphasized by agencies such as NTA during evaluations (e.g.,digitized scanning systems),allegations like this underline potential gaps that could damage institutional credibility if unresolved satisfactorily or explained comprehensively. Should this matter proceed to court filings as intended by Spurthy S., it may set a precedent for addressing grievances linked to exam procedures more exhaustively.A transparent review process involving third-party validation could help both alleviate individual concerns and reinforce confidence in these processes for future aspirants. For now, whether procedural oversight or an isolated misunderstanding occurred will likely be pivotal for resolution ahead amidst widespread student vigilance over fairness norms across competitive exams.

Read More