Indore (Madhya Pradesh): A petition alleging a 241-mark discrepancy in the NEET-UG 2026 result has reached the Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, with the petitioner also challenging the legal status and constitutional validity of the National Testing Agency (NTA).
Lokendra Singh Khadiya, a student from Jhabua district, has filed a writ petition through advocate Abhinav P. Dhanodkar, alleging serious inconsistencies between his official OMR sheet, the official answer key and the final result declared by the NTA.
According to the petition, the OMR sheet and answer key show that he secured 305 marks, but the final result awarded him only 64 marks a discrepancy of 241 marks that has allegedly jeopardised his chances of securing admission to medical courses.
The petition states that after passing Class XII in 2024, Khadiya spent nearly two years preparing for NEET in Indore.
Following the cancellation of the earlier examination, he appeared for the re-examination on June 21. When the NTA uploaded the OMR sheet on July 14, his first login allegedly displayed blank responses in the Physics and Chemistry sections.
However, on logging in again shortly afterwards, a different OMR sheet showing his marked responses appeared, which the petition describes as a serious technical flaw in the NTA's online system.
Based on the second OMR sheet and the official answer key, the petitioner claims he scored 104 marks in Physics, 125 in Chemistry and 76 in Biology, taking his total to 305 marks.
Despite emailing the NTA immediately after the results were declared on July 16, he alleges that no corrective action was taken, affecting his participation in counselling for MBBS, BDS, BAMS, BHMS, BUMS, BVSc and BSc Nursing courses.
The petition seeks verification of the OMR sheet, evaluation process and mark calculation, clarifying that it seeks correction of an apparent discrepancy rather than re-evaluation.
It further contends that the NTA, being a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and not a statutory body, lacks the legal authority to conduct national entrance examinations.
Hearing the matter, a Division Bench comprising Justice Subodh Abhyankar and Justice Alok Awasthi directed the respondents to obtain instructions regarding the petitioner's OMR sheet and listed the matter for hearing next week.
