KUM. QAUSEN MULLA vs THE UNION OF INDIA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
280-DB
of 2026
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
D
IN THE HIGH
H COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
IS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
DATED THI
PRESENT
THE HON'B
BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
AND
THE HON'
BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARNI
WRIT APPE
EAL NO.100958 OF 2026 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
KUM. QAUSEN MULLA
D/O. ABDULSAYEED
AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC
R/O: C/O: ABDUL SA
SHAHBAZ HUSSAIN M
57/C, IMAM MOHALLA
DAVANGERE – 577 6
PERMANENT ADDRES
R/O: KODIYALA HOS
TALUK: RANEBENNU
DIST: HAVERI – 581
A
@ SHAHBAZ HUSEIN,
C: STUDENT,
AYEED
MULLA,
A, HARIHAR,
601,
SS
PET,
R,
123.
Digitally signed by
RAKESH S
HARIHAR
Location: High
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
PELLANT
…APP
(BY SRI. PRASHANT
AND:
1. THE UNION OF I
R/BY MINISTRY
THROUGH ITS S
124-C, SHASTRI
NEW DELHI – 11
2. THE NATIONAL T
R/BY ITS DIREC
S KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)
INDIA,
OF EDUCATION
SECRETARY,
I BHAVAN,
10 001.
TESTING AGENCY (NTA),
CTOR GENERAL,
- 2 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
ST
1 FLOOR, NSIC
OKHLA INDUSTR
NEW DELHI – 11
C-MDBP BUILDING,
RIAL ESTATE,
10 020.
3. THE STATE OF K
R/BY ITS PRINC
DEPARTMENT O
M.S. BUILDING,
BENGALURU – 5
4. THE KARNATAKA
R/BY ITS EXECU
TH
18 CROSS, SA
MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU – 5
KARNATAKA,
CIPAL SECRETARY,
F MEDICAL EDUCATION,
, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
560 001.
A EXAMINATION AUTHORITY (KEA),
UTIVE DIRECTORR,
AMPIGE ROAD,
M,
560 012.
…RESPON
NDENTS
(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJA
SMT. GIRIJA S. H
SMT. SURABHI KU
THIS WRIT
AYA S. HALLIKERI, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2,
IREMATH, HCGP FOR R3,
ULKARNI, ADV. FOR R4)
APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
4 OF
KARNATAKA HIGH C
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO ALLO
OW THE
APPEAL AND SET AS
SIDE ORDER DATED 16.09.2026 CONSEQ
QUENTLY
SET ASIDE ORDER
DATED 20.08.2026 PASSED BY THE LE
EARNED
SINGLE JUDGE IN W
WRIT PETITION NO.107032/2026 FILED
BY THE
APPELLANT BEFORE
HON’BLE COURT AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL,
COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARIN
NG THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS
S DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASAN
NA
AND
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARN
NI
- 3 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
ORAL JUDGMENT
BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA )
(PER: HON'B
ng the
The appellan
nts were before the Court seekin
following prayer.
i. Allow t
16.09.2
20.08.2
W.P.No.
before H
ii. Pass su
Hon’ble
and circ
justice a
2. Owing t
he appeal and set aside order date
026 consequently set aside order date
026 passed by the learned single judge i
d
d
n
nt
107032/2026 filed by the appellan
Hon’ble Court.
uch other order(s) or relief(s) as thi
is
ts
of
Court deems fit and proper in the fact
cumstances of the case, in the interest o
and equity.
nsel for
to the submission of the learned coun
the appellants, this
s Court passed the following order:
“Learned
filed a memo
original OMR
appellant. The
d counsel Sri. Mrutyunjaya S Hallikeri ha
as
he
he
appending to it, a scanned copy of th
sheet and attendance sheet of th
same is taken into the file.
2. Th
merit, is ques
sheet.
3. Th
appellant and
discrepancy. In
question No.40
furnished. The
sheet, the app
that she had
he appellant, who claims to be a student
stioning the answers circled in the OM
of
MR
he OMR sheet was furnished to th
he
ain
the OMR sheet is said to be having certa
nitially, the appellant projected that it wa
0 on 15.07.2026 when the OMR sheet wa
as
as
MR
ers
next day, on a further perusal at the OM
pellant notices that several of the answe
circled were not found in the OMR shee
et.
- 4 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
26
he
he
he
ho
Therefore, com
within 24 hou
appellant wou
learned Single
companion pe
had participate
mmunicated a second mail on 16.07.202
urs. Apprehending that the merit of th
ld vanish to thin air, had approached th
Judge, as the learned Single Judge in th
etition concerning another candidate wh
ed, had passed the following order:
“ I
a merito
her SSLC
2nd yea
petitione
26 condu
03.05.20
of the ex
declared
of 720 m
of Optic
website o
It is the case of the petitioner that she is
rious student, having scored 97.44% in
C examinations (Class-X) and 88% in the
ar Pre-university Examinations. The
r has appeared for examination in 2025-
ucted by the National Testing Agency on
026 as well as in June-2026. The results
xamination conducted in June-2026 were
and the petitioner has secured -11 out
marks. The petitioner had secured a copy
al Mark Recognition from the official
of the NTA.
2.
has atte
questions
she had
petitione
in the OM
invigilato
It is the case of the petitioner that she
empted 165 questions out of 180
s. However, the OMR sheet reveals that
d attempted only 41 questions. The
r seeks to point out various discrepancies
MR sheet as to the time denoted by the
or/s as also her thumb impression.
3.
and 2 h
scanned
other d
furnished
petition.
Learned counsel for respondents No.1
has filed a memo placing on record a
copy of the OMR sheet together with
ocuments. The same is also been
d as Annexure-E along with the writ
4.
the petiti
discrepan
petition a
inspectio
It is the fervent plea made on behalf of
ioner that the same does not answer the
ncies that have been articulated in the
and hence the petitioner has sought for
n of the original OMR sheet.
5.
No.1 an
inspectio
scanned
responde
The learned counsel for the respondents
nd 2 has vehemently opposed the
n of the original OMR sheet, since a
copy of the same is produced by the
ents No.1 and 2.
- 5 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
6.
regard t
candidate
allegation
petitione
circumsta
that the
original O
No.2-NTA
In view of the aforementioned, having
to the petitioner being an meritorious
e, as well as the nature of
ns/apprehensions expressed by the
r and in view of the peculiar facts and
ances of the present case, it is expedient
petitioner be permitted to inspect the
OMR sheet at the office of the respondent
A at the address shown in the cause title.
7.
present a
at the ad
1st Floor
Estate, N
along w
identifica
shall als
petitione
petitione
examine
No.26633
officials o
of inspec
Accordingly, the petitioner shall be
at the office of the respondent No.2-NTA
ddress mentioned in the cause title, i.e.,
r NSIC-MDBP building, Okhla industrial
New Delhi, on 17.08.2026 at 11.00 a.m.,
with requisite documents of her
ation. One of the parents of the petitioner
so be permitted to accompany the
r. Officials of the NTA shall permit the
r (bearing Roll No.2720101256) to
the original OMR sheet bearing Booklet
34344. It shall be open to one of the
of the NTA to also be present at the time
tion.
8.
peculiar
treated a
This order, having been made in the
facts of the present case, shall not be
as a precedent.
9.
10
Re-list on 20.08.2026.
0. Hand delivery of this order is
d. ”
permitted
4. Th
inspection of t
sheet is said t
and therefore,
The appellant
making a sub
The learned Si
the following o
he learned Single Judge had permitte
the OMR sheet. The inspection of the OM
to have led to no discrepancy in that cas
ed
MR
se
the said candidate withdrew the petitio
n.
by
also sought to withdraw the petition b
mission before the learned Single Judg
ingle Judge on the said submission passe
order:
e.
ed
“ After arguing the matter for
ometime, learned counsel Sri. Prakash
so
Ba
wi
adiger, for the petitioner seeks leave to
ithdraw the present petition.
- 6 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
2. Placing the said submission on
ecord, the present writ petition is
smissed as withdrawn.
re
di
3. Learned counsel for the
etitioner is permitted to file the memo
pe
fo
we
r withdrawal in the Registry within one
eek. ”
5. Re
petition on an
seeking recalli
Single Judge r
order:
ealizing the folly of withdrawal of th
n error, an application in IA No.1/202
ing of the order was filed. The learne
refused to recall the order by the followin
he
26
ed
ng
“
writ pet
the ques
recalling
Having regard to the fact that the
tition was dismissed as withdrawn,
stion of entertaining IA No.1/2026 for
g the said order does not arise.
Ac
re
ccordingly, the application stands
ejected. ”
6. It
that has driven
is this order of the learned Single Judg
n the present petitioner before us.
ge
7. Th
Kadadevar sub
merit should
technicality. T
Single Judge
inspection of t
present appella
imposed with
sheet after ins
produced befo
appellant.
8. Th
Hallikeri subm
candidate, this
he learned counsel Sri. Prasha
bmits that the appellant is meritorious an
nt
nd
not be given a go-by by any chance
herefore, he would seek what the learne
of
ed
had granted to another candidate, i.
the OMR sheet be permitted even to th
ant. He would submit that any condition b
e.
he
be
MR
regard to imposition of costs, if the OM
spection is found to be the same that
ore the Court which is furnished to th
is
he
he learned counsel Sri. Mrutyunjaya
mits that if this is permitted to eve
S
ry
s would open pandora box.
- 7 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
ry
he
9. W
candidate com
OMR sheet, it w
we cannot ig
compromised b
We are aware of the fact that if eve
es to the Court and seeks inspection of th
would undoubtedly open pandoras box. B
ut
be
nore the fact that merit should not b
by any stretch of technicality.
10. In
situation to a o
permit the insp
In the event,
before us and
would be dism
₹2,50,000/-. T
at that point i
same.
11. Su
inspection of th
n those circumstances, as a one-o
one-off problem, we deem it appropriate
off
to
nt.
pection of the OMR sheet by the appellan
the OMR sheet is the same as produce
d there is no difference, the writ appe
ed
eal
issed with imposition of exemplary costs
There would be no equity can be projecte
of
ed
he
n time when the OMR sheet would be th
ubject to the aforesaid condition, th
he OMR sheet shall be permitted.
he
12. Ac
at the office o
Testing Agenc
Press Building
12.10.2026
documents of
appellant sha
petitioner. Offi
to examine th
one of the offi
time of inspect
ccordingly, the appellant shall be prese
of the respondent No.2-NTA i.e., Nation
th
cy (NTA), 5 Floor, Government of Indi
nt
nal
a,
on
g, Minto Road, New-Delhi-110002, o
at 11.00 a.m., along with requisi
her identification. One of the parents of th
ll also be permitted to accompany th
icials of the NTA shall permit the appella
he original OMR sheet. It shall be open
te
he
he
nt
to
he
icials of the NTA to also be present at th
tion.
13. Th
aforesaid cond
he examination is permitted subject to th
he
ition of imposition of costs.
14. Li
matters.
15. A
learned counse
st this matter on 16.10.2026 in fres
sh
photocopy of this order be furnished
el Sri.Mrutyunjaya S Hallikeri.
to
- 8 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
cted by
3. The OM
MR sheet was permitted to be inspec
the appellants, who
o are stated to have inspected the sam
me and
filed an affidavit to
o that effect. The appellants now co
ome up
with a new theory t
that the attachments were not rendere
ed. The
purpose for which
inspection of the OMR sheet was pe
rmitted
stands fulfilled, and
d such inspection has disclosed no dif
fference
between what was
s furnished to the appellants and wh
hat was
subsequently seen
n by them upon inspection. The af
ffidavit,
therefore, does not
t take the cause of the student any fur
rther.
4. In the
light of the earlier order, wher
rein an
undertaking was
rendered that the writ appeal wo
ould be
dismissed with exe
emplary costs of ₹2,50,000/-, we d
deem it
appropriate to rej
ect the appeal with costs of ₹1,00
0,000/-,
instead of ₹2,50,0
00/-. This is only on the consideratio
on that
the appellant is a s
student who has knocked at the doors
s of this
Court. However, th
he appellant is admonished that the p
process
of this Court ough
ht not to be misused by bringing up
p every
grievance.
- 9 -
280-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100958 o
CNR: KAHC0201877720
026
Library
5. The cos
sts shall be payable to the Advocates’
Fund within a perio
od of eight weeks from today.
Ordered acco
rdingly.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(HEMA KULKARNI)
JUDGE
RSH / CT: ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7