Probe manipulation of OMR sheets for NEET: Madras High Court

ADVERTISEMENT

STOCK MARKET BSE NSE
  1. Probe manipulation of OMR sheets for NEET: Madras High Court

He further said he complained to the NTA via e-mail, attaching both OMR sheets downloaded from the NTA website. However since there was no response, he moved the court.

Published: 11th December 2020 04:35 AM  |   Last Updated: 11th December 2020 04:35 AM  |  A+A-

Madras High Court

Madras High Court (File photo | EPS)

By Express News Service

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has ordered the National Testing Agency (NTA) to ascertain possibilities of manipulating OMR answer sheets of NEET candidates uploaded in its official website. The court also directed the agency to explain the availability of two OMR sheets for a Coimbatore-based student, who approached the court alleging irregularity.

The issue pertains to KS Manoj, who moved the court saying he downloaded his answer sheet twice on October 15 and October 17 from the NTA website and found disparities in the answers marked. He also stated that he got 594 marks out of 720.  However, it was 248 marks when he downloaded it the second time.

He further said he complained to the NTA via e-mail, attaching both OMR sheets downloaded from the NTA website. However since there was no response, he moved the court. The court in its order, observed that it is really concerned and quite apprehensive as to whether such manipulation of OMR sheets is possible.

“As it is, anything in an electronic mode is susceptible to manipulation and nobody can rule it out completely. If such manipulation is, in fact, possible, it is really a danger which requires immediate investigation,” it added.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

“Even if there is a remote chance of manipulating the OMR sheet, that is a clear harbinger of the malady that it can cause to the entire selection process,” said the bench. The court then directed the NTA to conduct an investigation and file a report explaining how two different OMR sheets containing the name of the petitioner were uploaded. It then adjourned the hearing in the case to December 23. For petitioner advocats. m ravi and Priya ravi argued

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Now ButtonCALL ME