1- !"#$%$ &'() *) +$,-&&$ )))$$ &- .-%/% &$ & !&"$&" 0-% )))%1 &"&% 2'342)+ +.+4 542)+ +4 Present: Mr. Yashpal Marken, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate, Senior Panel Counsel, UOI, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Ravi Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr. Arun Gosain, Advocate, Ms. Swati Arora, Advocate and Mr. Ramandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for respondent No.4NTA. Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.6. Mr. Ravi Kamal Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.7CBI. 6666 +.+47) 1. Petitioner has approached this Court, , for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 4National Testing Agency (NTA) to preserve and produce the original physical OMR answer sheet as also a direction to explain the change in the result. Petitioner has sought an enquiry into the alleged alteration of petitioner's result. KAMAL SHARMA 2026.08.13 17:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh. 2- 2. After hearing the counsel for petitioner, this Court found that there was a variance between the two OMR sheets, Annexure P5 and P6, whereby there was a substantial discrepancy in the result of petitioner, who had appeared in the NEET (UG) examination conducted on 21.06.2026. Vide order dated 05.08.2026, this Court directed the respondents to produce the OMR sheets of both the roll numbers. On 10.08.2026, this Court passed the following order: !"#$%%!%&! '( )*+) ) , , ' - !.#$%%!!&!) *& , %##"/#/+ 0 12'3 ('',1 (3, 4 0 5'4 ( 6 5 75' 8 *9:5,#&#"/#/+ '; !"#$%%!%&!1 * ; /+#$%#+##<#%(= - /+$.&"+!!: ; /+$.&"+!!3 ';;;0,0 ( 5 75'8 ( , / ; ' ;' !.#$%%!!&!1)*&3 44(1>3/#/+ /%#+/#/+ 5 78 ,8 ) ?0 ( )5@ ) ;' 1!.#$%%!!&!3, ( ;' KAMAL SHARMA 2026.08.13 17:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh. 3- 1!.#$%%!!&!3 5 7 8 ! ( 5 A8 ,-, ',B 8 , - , @ ' 2 %!#"/#/+B 3. Matter was deferred to today on the request of counsel for the petitioner, who has asserted that an enquiry ought to be conducted to ascertain a reason for the change in the petitioner's result, who had stood first in the examination. 4. Opposing the submission, Mr. Arun Gosain, counsel for NTA, asserts that petitioner has committed a fraud and the OMR sheet, Annexure P5, is an outcome of a clever forgery. He has requested that permission be granted to NTA to prosecute the petitioner. He has also placed reliance upon judgments passed by this Court in , (CWP 198642024, decided on 03.09.2024) as well as (CWP 180282025, decided on 18.07.2025) to submit that similar situation had arisen before this Court on an earlier occasion also. 5. We have heard counsel for the parties and considered their submissions. 6. The OMR sheet, Annexure P5, relied upon by petitioner shows that it has been issued to roll number 390411353. Stand taken by NTA is that this roll number was never issued to any candidate and is fictitious. Original OMR sheet, Annexure P6, has been examined by this Court as is evident from the above reproduced order. Petitioner has scored 160 out of 720 marks as per the result declared by NTA. This Court has also examined both the judgments KAMAL SHARMA 2026.08.13 17:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh. 4- relied upon by counsel for NTA. This Court is satisfied that the OMR sheet, Annexure P6, pertains to petitioner and it has been correctly evaluated. The possibility of overwriting or altering roll number on OMR sheet, Annexure P5, cannot be ruled out. 7. The requests made by counsel for the petitioner for conducting an enquiry and by the counsel for NTA for prosecuting the petitioner are declined. This court is of the view that no case is made out for interference in the writ petition, which is dismissed. +.+4 +4 13.08.2026 C Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KAMAL SHARMA 2026.08.13 17:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.