Food Inspector Candidate Who Expected 157 Marks But Scored 13.128 Loses OMR Tampering Appeal; Chhattisgarh HC Finds No Sign Of Manipulation

The appellant sat for the Board’s offline Food Inspector examination on 4 January 2022 and received a carbon copy of his OMR answer sheet at the examination centre.

Although he expected to score 157 marks from that copy, he was awarded 13.128 marks.

After obtaining the Board’s OMR sheet under the Right to Information Act, 2005, he alleged a mismatch and suspected tampering

The Single Judge examined the original OMR sheet produced by the Board and dismissed the appellant’s writ petition.

In this appeal, the appellant sought expert examination of the original and carbon copies.

The Division Bench also examined the copies produced by the parties

The Court had separately condoned the 10-day delay in filing the appeal

The judgment cites no specific statutory provision or precedent as the basis for its decision.

It applies the principle that an expert examination need not be ordered where a party makes only a bald allegation of manipulation, without identifying supporting details, and the available documents disclose no sign of tampering

The Court also considered whether the Single Judge had committed an error warranting appellate interference

The serial number on the Board’s OMR sheet matched the carbon copy.

The Court noted that the Board’s copy bore the appellant’s and invigilator’s signatures and the examination-centre seal, while those features were faint or absent on the carbon copy.

The appellant did not dispute the signatures or the roll number on the Board’s sheet, and the Court found no sign of tampering or manipulation

As the appellant had not specified how the sheet was allegedly altered, the Court held that an expert referral was unnecessary and found no error in the Single Judge’s conclusion

It dismissed the writ appeal as devoid of merit