Bindhushree J. Pawar, a National Eligibility cum Entrance Test Undergraduate (NEET UG) 2026 aspirant from Hangal in Haveri district, has alleged a mix-up in her Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheet. The mix-up, she says, has cost her a medical seat she had already begun to plan around.Her result shows a score of -11. She was expecting 663.
A gap too large to explain
According to Bindhushree, the National Testing Agency’s (NTA) answer key, released on June 21, indicated she would score 663 marks. When results were declared on July 16, her score sheet showed -11 instead.The scale of the gap is what first raised her suspicion. A negative score after an expected 663 is not the kind of variation that comes from a few wrong answers. It suggested, to her and her family, that something had gone wrong with the sheet itself, not the marking.
An OMR sheet that does not match
Bindhushree contends that while the OMR sheet sent to her carries her name, roll number and signature, the answers on it do not reflect what she remembers marking on exam day.She said she had attempted 165 questions. The OMR sheet sent to her shows only 41 entries. She also said the pattern of blackened circles did not resemble her own handwriting style of marking answers.Her father, Jagadish Pawar, said the family had trusted the process until they saw the sheet for themselves. “When we checked the OMR, it appeared to be of someone else,” he said. He added that Bindhushree had undergone two years of coaching and had consistently performed well in practice tests, which made the result harder to accept. “We urge the NTA to please send her original OMR sheet and give us justice,” he said.
The one-minute question
Among the details Bindhushree has pointed to is the timestamp recorded on the sheet. Her entry time is shown as 1.56 p.m. and her exit time as 1.57 p.m., a gap of one minute.“I don’t understand how a student can complete his or her OMR sheet filling in just one minute,” she said.The sheet also carries her signature timed at 1.52 p.m., along with signatures of two invigilators, one at 1.56 p.m. and another at 1.57 p.m. The sequence of these timings, she said, does not add up against the volume of answers a candidate would need to mark.
A second thumb impression
Bindhushree also raised concern over the fingerprint on the sheet, which she said appeared to carry a second, overlapping thumb impression. She maintains that her signature and other personal details on the sheet are correct, even as she questions whether the answer entries belong to her.
No response despite repeated attempts
Bindhushree emailed the NTA on July 22, requesting her original OMR sheet, which she believes would confirm her expected score of 663. She has not received a reply. Calls made by her teachers to the NTA helpline have also gone unanswered, according to her.The Haveri district administration has since forwarded her grievance to the NTA. As of now, there has been no response from the agency addressing the specific discrepancies she has flagged, including the mismatch in entry count, the timestamp gap and the fingerprint concern.
Part of a wider pattern
Hangal has seen scrutiny of the NEET process before. The region was the site of a symbolic satyagraha earlier this year, held to protest alleged paper leaks connected to the examination. Bindhushree’s case now adds to a growing list of grievances from the district around how the NEET UG process has been conducted and verified.For now, her result stands unchanged. Her family continues to wait for a response, and for the one document they believe would settle the matter: the original OMR sheet.(with agency inputs)
