DIBYA JYOTI NANDA Vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 20.07.2018, this Court directed that the matter to be listed today as Shri T.N. Pattanayak, learned counsel for the opposite party-CBSE had request to allow the Director, NEET, CBSE to appear before this Court to explain the discrepancy in the marking/evaluation of the OMR answer sheet of the petitioner. Since this case was not placed in the regular list, a mention was made by Shri T.N. Pattanayak, learned counsel for opposite party no.2-CBSE in the morning hour that the Director, NEET is present as the date was fixed to today and, on his request, the case is taken up as a Special Notice matter in presence of learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The brief facts of this case are that the petitioner had appeared NEET (UG)-2018 Examination conducted by the CBSE for admission in MBBS Course. He was allowed registration no.40236074, roll no.50990308 and test booklet no.2281248, having examination centre at St. Xaviers High School, Mahima Nagar, Naya Bazar, Cutack. The date of examination was 06.05.2018. He was issued with an admit card to appear at such examination. The petitioner performed the examination to his satisfaction and ultimately the CBSE published the result of the NEET (UG)- 2018 in due time. CBSE, in its website on 25.05.2018, also published the answer key of questions, so also OMR sheet of the candidates for verification, as well as for appeal, in case of any error was found by the candidates. The petitioner, on verification, found two errors and challenged the same on payment of requisite fees. The petitioner specifically challenged that the answer as per the CBSE answer key in respect of question no.146 (Chemistry) was option no.4 and he blackened the said option no.4, but mark against the said question was not awarded to him. Secondly, in Physics from question no.1 to 45 was answered by the petitioner and on re-consideration of the questions, OMR sheet and answer key, the petitioner is entitled to get 102 marks, but in the result published on 05.06.2018, he was awarded with only 97 marks. Even though the petitioner filed objection, the same was not considered in proper perspective. Finding no other way out, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present application.

(3.) Shri S.J. Nanda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended in course of hearing that besides blackening of the circle of the option in the OMR sheet, which the petitioner had given for answers to Questions No.61, 146 and 147, there were certain dot marks in other option columns, because of which, though the answer to Question 147 was accepted and taken as correct, but the answers to Questions No.61 and 146 were negated, even though dot marks (as noticed by this Court vide order dated 13.07.2018 after having examined the original OMR sheet) with regard to Questions No.61 and 146 were lesser than the one in the answer to Question No.147. Thus, it is contended that the petitioner is entitled to get mark against question no. 61 and question no. 146 so as to enable him to score higher marks so that he can get better institution for admission. It is further contended that on the basis of the result published, the petitioner had also taken admission to the VSS Medical College, Burla, but in the event the marks will be enhanced, he may exercise his option for upgradation of institution and prosecute the studies in a better institution than the present one. Therefore, being aggrieved by the evaluation of his answer script, which was on OMR sheet, the petitioner has filed this writ petition claiming that the answer to Questions No.61 and 146 have wrongly not been evaluated and negative marks awarded, even though the answers to Question No.146 was correct.