New Delhi, Aug 19 Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Delhi High Court on Wednesday that there was no tampering with the OMR sheets of candidates of the NEET-UG re-test.
Appearing in a PIL on the issue, Mehta said that "loose kind of drafting and arguments" alleging "large-scale tampering" in the re-test ought not be allowed as they would set a "narrative".
"There is no tampering in any OMR sheet. None of this has happened. Don't sensationalise," he submitted before a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia.
The bench was hearing the PIL by two NEET-UG candidates seeking additional marks for themselves, as well as "similarly affected candidates" for certain dropped questions, and scrapping of the National Testing Agency (NTA).
One of the petitioners also alleged that her OMR sheet had been tampered with.
The PIL sought the constitution of an expert committee to look into the concerns over irregularities in the examination raised by the petitioners.
Mehta stated that the petitioner's case appeared to be of a mismatch between her "rough work" on the question paper and the answer marked on the OMR sheet, and there was no manipulation.
"They say there is tampering with the OMR sheet. Who will tamper," Mehta asked.
The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issues raised in the plea, including that of tampering with OMR sheets and non-award of marks for dropped questions, concerned thousands of candidates.
However, only two of them came forward for filing the plea as others were not permitted by their parents, he stated.
The bench refused to entertain the PIL, stating that it sought relief which could not be granted.
The court said it would consider the issues if any aggrieved student approached it in an individual capacity, and not in a PIL.
"What we find is that it is a mixed bunch of prayers seeking relief for the petitioner and all other candidates. Writ petition with such a mixture of prayers can't be entertained," the court concluded.
The court dismissed the petition as withdrawn, granting one petitioner liberty to file a separate PIL on institutional reforms in public examinations like NEET.
The court permitted the second candidate to file a plea regarding her allegations of OMR tampering.
