The bench of Justice Chandrachud and Justice Bopanna to hear the matter of discrepency in OMR scanning in NEET UG exam.
SC: They have filed an elaborate reply. They have the originals with the sign of the petitioner. There is no question of scanning different OMR sheets.
SC: We'll come back after lunch at 2 o'clock. All members of bar can also take a break.
Sr Adv Manoj Swarup: In Q1 he has ticked the second box, Q3 first box. Identical to 49 and 50.
SC: Why would the NTA want to doctor your results? They are saying we'll give you the original.
Swarup: Three things are implanted. They have an OMR sheet. There is a butter paper behind it.
Each cadidate will have to return both of them. The original signature are at the foot of the page only.
Prabhnoor Singh signs bottom left hand corner. I call their paper not genuine.
Swarup: They call my paper not genuine.
They themselves say before we declared result on 15/10.
On 13/10 entire database was transferred to Kotnik. If it's given to an outside agency, they are likely to tinker.
SC: How many candidates are there?
SC: Mr Rupesh, can we present the original OMR with their signature.
Adv Rupesh(NTA): Yes my lord.
Swarup: Take petitioner 5, Sakshi. Kindly see they say 57 is incorrect and 58 is correct, we say the reverse. If you juxtapose- half fold it, QR code of 57 and 58 I can't have.
Swarup: Kindly turn to 94 of the WP. This is attributed to petitioner 2. These are exact circles as if made by a machine. Compare to 93 petitioner 1 which has a human angle. some circle will be less some more. It won't be perfect. This is exactly the same as 53 of counter.
Swarup: I'm using a very cautious term.
SC: Yes, Mr Rupesh.
Adv Rupesh Kumar: We had sent an email on 1/10 to all candidates that was the scanned version of their OMR sheets.
It has been said on 15/10 it was not sent by NEET but NIC. Blind copy of the same is marked to NTA.
Kumar: We are producing this blind copy. We have asked for a specific clarification whether any such tinkering is possible.
"A copy of the email is also BCC to NTA"
Reads email by NIC
Kumar: In addition to earlier mail, none of the OMR sheets have been replaced or changed. The same is on the server.
They say only a few candidates were sent the email. Only petitioner 1 has received. We have sent to all. It's with NTA, students and NIC.
It's blatantly wrong.
Kumar: We have claimed upon these students to have a look at the original OMRs.
SC: Oh you called them to see the originals also?
Kumar: The petitioners cannot disprove that these are not their own. 5 of them with their parents have confirmed they are the original OMR.
Kumar: There has to be some basis in making these wild allegations against NTA.
SC: Mr Swarup, this is not a case of wrongdoing.
Swarup: My case is not that we didn't get the 15/10 email. That's why we are comparing the result.
We were in their office. There was a glass wall b/w
Swarup: us. OMR sheet can only be verified by touching
SC: This is far fetched.
No, Mr Swarup.
They showed you original.
Swarup: We were across the glass.
SC: The relief being sought is that the results/scorecards of petitioners declared to be null and void.
Scanned images of
SC: OMR sheets was shown. On 1/11/21 the results were declared on official website. According to the petitioners, the marks they calculated based on 15/10 were different from result. Resp 1 uploaded OMR.
Thepetitioners claim the OMR sheet was different from that uploaded on 15/10
SC: 15,44,274 candidates appeared for NEET UG. Results declared 1/11/21.
Clause 13.1 of information bulletin contains provisions for display of OMR sheets on website and challenging it.
13.2 provides for display of answer key which is open to challenge.
On 15/10/21 , all
SC: candidates were shown their OMR sheet with answer key.
The website is hosted by NIC. The OMR answer key recorded responses and provisional answer key was uploaded on NTA website. The images of OMR sheets to email id of candidates including petitioners.
SC: There is only one uploaded OMR sheet per candidate and no tampering has been done. It was stated that there was no difference between OMR uploaded.
The OMR answersheet of the petitioners is stated to have their original writing along with their and invigilator's sign.
SC: 5 of the petitioners with their parents submitted that it's their original OMR.
It is not necessary to enquire into the claim of first resp into the alleged act of fabrication of the OMR sheets.
As it is not in dispute that the original OMR sheet, 5 have been duly verified.
SC: It cannot prima facie be suggested that there was any act of tampering or manipulation in the back office of NTA. The examination has been attempted by 15.44 lakh candidates out of whom 6 have come to this court. 5 verified their OMRs.