Single-judge disposal of a writ petition challenging NEET 2025 marks revision. The High Court disposed of the petition by taking the statement of the respondent's counsel on record without issuing reliefs.
None. The petition was disposed of by taking the respondent's statement on record.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2025:UHC:7911
| SL. No. |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPMS 2604/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Adhikari, Standing Counsel, for the Union of India. Mr. Shashank Upadhyaya, Advocate, for the respondent no. 2. |
|||
| (2) Petitioner participated in NEET (UG) 2025, held by National Testing Agency. According to the petitioner, originally, his marks, as declared by National Testing Agency, were 555 out of 720, but subsequently the marks were revised and petitioner was given score card in which his score was mentioned as 21 out of 720. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus/certiorari directing Respondent No. 2 (NTA) to produce before this Hon’ble Court the petitioner’s original OMR sheet, answer key, and evaluation records pertaining to NEET-UG 2025. (ii) Quash/set aside the erroneous result showing 21 marks and direct the respondents to re-evaluate and restore the petitioner’s correct score of 555 marks (as initially reflected). (iii) Direct the Respondents to allow the petitioner to register and participate in NEET-UG 2025 counselling on the basis of his correct score and rank.” |
|||
| (3) Mr. Shashank Upadhyaya, learned Counsel appearing for the National Testing Agency/respondent no. 2, however, |
2025:UHC:7911
disputes the submission made by learned Counsel for the petitioner. He submits that marks sheet was never revised and there is no material, whatsoever, with the petitioner to show that originally his marks were 555 out of 720. He submits that as per the result, petitioner could score only 21 marks out of 720. He handed over copy of the OMR Sheet to learned Counsel for the petitioner and he, therefore, submits that the relief as sought by the petitioner do not survive, as he has only sought copy of the OMR Sheet.
(4) Having regard to the facts of the case and also the submission made by learned Counsel for the petitioner, writ petition is disposed of by taking the statement made by Mr. Upadhayaya on record.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
8.9.2025
Pr
PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2025.09.10 16:47:00 +05'30'
2025:UHC:7911
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the NEET 2025 marks revision shall be disposed of solely by taking the submitted statement.
Petitioner
National Testing Agency
Union of India
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
