MP High Court Asks NTA To Consider Plea By IIT Aspirant Whose JEE (Advanced) Exam Was Disrupted By Technical Glitches
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on July 9, disposed of a writ petition filed by an IIT Aspirant, who alleged that a technical glitch in his computer hampered his performance in paper 2 of JEE (Advanced) held on May 18, 2025.
While disposing of the petition, the court asked the National Testing Agency (NTA) to consider the aspirant's representation.
The aspirant claimed that the computer he was allotted was faulty. It was submitted that the mouse continuously lagged, flickered and became unresponsive during the exam, adversely affecting his performance.
The bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Rajendra Kumar Vani noted that the aspirant was granted 15 extra minutes in his examination. Acknowledging that the malfunction would have caused mental agony to the student, the bench stated that "all these technical glitches and malfunctioning are required to be avoided at any cost".
However, the bench emphasised that "Court cannot substitute any pattern other than the prescribed one", noting that the authority to grant additional marks rests with the respondents, the Union Government and the NTA.
Thus, the court said the respondents may consider the representation of the students, but also noted that the student had already secured a seat at IIT Kharagpur, which has long drawn a legacy and fame.
The bench disposed of the aspirant stating "Respondents may consider the representation of petitioner in accordance with law. Else petitioner is already in a better institute (IIT Kharagpur) with long drawn legacy and fame".
The aspirant had sought the following reliefs:
1. A recalculation of his scores to reflect the marks he could have achieved in the absence of such interruptions
2. To consider his JEE (Mains) marks as a benchmark for assessing his JEE (Advanced) performance
3. To conduct an independent inquiry into the alleged malfunctioning of the footage of the second session of the exam in which he appeared.
The aspirant argued that he faced 11 minutes of interrupted exam time, from 2:47 to 2:54 PM, from 3:03 to 3:05 PM and from 3:12 PM to 3:14 PM.
The aspirant argued that some sympathetic consideration should be extended to him. He requested that either his additional marks be granted or that his JEE (Mains) performance be used as the benchmark.
In response, the Union argued that the aspirant was granted 15 minutes of compensatory time, extending his exam session from 5:30 to 5:45 PM. It was also argued that his performance was above the national average and that the aspirant was able to secure a seat at IIT Kharagpur.
The National Testing Agency also argued that awarding extra marks beyond the additional time granted to the petitioner was not permissible.
For Petitioner: Advocate Sameer Kumar Shrivastava
For Union: Deputy Solicitor General Praveen Kumar Newaskar
For IIT Kanpur: Advocate Chetan Kanoongo
Case Title: Kumar Panchjanya v Union of India (WRIT PETITION NO. 25508 of 2025)