The Bombay High Court has directed the National Evidence Agency (NTA) to produce the original OMR answer sheets of three NEET-UG 2026 candidates who have alleged significant discrepancies between their recorded answers and the marks declared in the examination results. The court has also issued notices to the NTA and the Central Government, seeking their responses to the petitions.The matter comes amid ongoing concerns over NEET-UG 2026, where several candidates across the country have raised questions on OMR sheets, recorded answers and final marks. Although the NTA has maintained that it is looking into the complaints and warned against submitting fake or AI-generated OMR sheets, a number of students have continued to approach the courts, alleging genuine discrepancies between their answer sheets and declared marks.The court is seeking the original records before the next hearingA division bench comprising Justice Nitin Suryawanshi and Justice Abhayasinh Shinde directed the NTA to keep the original OMR sheets and related records of the three petitioners ready for examination during the next hearing scheduled for July 30, 2026.Deputy Solicitor General Ajay Talhar, appearing for the central government, informed the court that the NTA had been directed to preserve and produce the original records on the next date of hearing.According to a Times of India report, the petitions have been filed by Richa Prafulla Deshpande of Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, Soham Nitin Gavte of Beed district and Atharva Jagtap of Dhule district. The three candidates claim that the marks calculated from their OMR sheets using the official answer key do not tally with the marks reflected in their result cards.Candidates allege huge differences between the OMRs and the resultsRepresenting Richa Deshpande, advocate Amit Yadkikar, assisted by advocates Sneha Yadkikar and Prasanna Jarare, told the court that the 17-year-old candidate downloaded her scanned OMR sheet from the NTA portal on July 13 and it was consistent with her performance in the June 21 re-examination. However, the OMR sheet emailed by the NTA on July 15 allegedly differed from the version available on the portal.The petition states that despite bringing the discrepancy to the notice of the NTA prior to the declaration of results, no response was received and the result announced on July 16 was based on the contested record. The petitioner has asked for verification of the original physical OMR sheet and correction of the result if necessary.In Soham Gavte’s case, advocates Sudarshan Salunkhe and Mahendra Gandle contended that the candidate should have scored 522 marks as per his OMR sheet and official answer key, but his mark sheet reflected only 95 marks. They informed the court that repeated emails sent to the NTA between July 17 and 19 seeking correction received no response.Another petition claims 597 points reduced to 45Atharva Jagtap’s counsel, Advocate Narendra Sonawane, argued that the OMR sheet emailed by the NTA on July 14 indicated a score of 597 marks, while the declared result showed only 45 marks.Further, the petition claims that even a calculation based on the scorecard itself gives 61 points, suggesting inconsistencies in the published result. It also claims that the issue remained unresolved despite representations made through the NTA’s grievance redressal mechanism.With the notices now being issued to the NTA and the Central Government, the Court will examine the original OMR sheets and related records during the next hearing on July 30 before deciding further on the matter.