NEW DELHI: The controversy over NEET UG 2026 OMR sheets continues to gather attention, with another candidate alleging that the answer sheets made available to him by the National Testing Agency (NTA) do not reflect the responses he marked during the examination. After corresponding with the agency and receiving an official reply, the candidate says his concerns remain unresolved and has now approached the media, sharing emails, OMR sheets and supporting documents.TOI Education has reviewed the candidate’s correspondence with the NTA, including the OMR sheets shared with him, his email seeking verification and the agency’s response. The case has surfaced amid a series of complaints from candidates questioning OMR records and evaluation after the declaration of NEET-UG 2026 results.
Candidate claims two OMR sheets raise different concerns
Bhavya, who appeared at Sarvodaya Vidyalaya (Jose Marti) examination centre, RK Puram, Delhi, alleges that the first scanned OMR sheet made available to him on the official portal was blurred and appeared to show all questions as attempted. According to him, the quality of the scan was significantly poorer than those shared with other candidates, making it difficult to verify the responses.In his email to the NTA, Bhavya said the responses displayed on the scanned OMR did not match the answers he distinctly remembered marking during the examination. He also claimed the document appeared visually inconsistent, alleging that some response bubbles seemed to overlap while others appeared “mechanically precise”. He requested verification of the original physical OMR sheet and restoration of access to his candidate portal, which he said had later displayed an “Invalid Credentials” message.The candidate further wrote that he wanted to see his original physical OMR sheet and requested the agency to compare it with the scanned version uploaded on the portal. He also sought an investigation into what he believed could be a scanning, processing or upload error.
NTA shares score details, issues warning
In its reply to the candidate, the NTA informed him that, as per the evaluation of his OMR sheet, he had 85 correct responses, 93 incorrect responses and a total score of 247. The agency stated that his scorecard had already been published on the official website and emailed to him.The reply also cautioned that “any tampering with your downloaded OMR sheet will result in proceedings under the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024.”
Candidate says concerns remain unresolved
According to Bhavya, the agency subsequently shared a clearer version of the OMR sheet. However, he claims that this document also does not match the responses he remembers marking during the examination.He alleges that while he attempted all 180 questions, the revised OMR reflects 178 attempted questions. More importantly, he maintains that neither of the two OMR sheets shared with him corresponds to the answers he marked in the examination hall.Following the NTA’s reply, the candidate says he again requested access to what he describes as his original physical OMR sheet. According to him, he has not received the verification he sought and is now approaching the media after exhausting the available grievance process.
Questions over grievance redressal continue
Bhavya’s complaint is among several raised by NEET-UG 2026 candidates after the OMR display window concluded. In recent days, candidates from different parts of the country have reported alleged discrepancies involving scanned OMR sheets, recorded responses and score calculations. The NTA has maintained that investigations into some complaints found AI-generated or tampered documents and has warned that fabricated OMR sheets could invite legal action.At the same time, some candidates continue to insist that their complaints involve genuine concerns and say they have approached the examination authority with supporting documents, emails and downloaded records. As more such cases emerge, attention is increasingly shifting beyond the examination itself to the grievance redressal process. For candidates whose medical admissions depend on a single examination, obtaining a clear, timely and transparent response to their representations remains as important as the evaluation process itself.
