NEET-UG 2024 Applicants Who Missed Both Correction Windows Cannot Switch From General To OBC After Results: Madras HC

The petitioners had applied for NEET (UG) 2024 under the General category, although they claimed to belong to the OBC category.

After the results were published, they sought to change their category and participate in the relevant counselling, relying on their OBC status and certificates.

The NEET information bulletin stated that category details would be treated as final and could not be changed after the correction window; candidates had also been given two opportunities to correct application details, which the petitioners did not use.

The Court considered the petitions together and framed the dispute as whether candidates could correct application details after the stipulated correction period had expired.

The Court applied Article 226 of the Constitution and the NEET (UG) 2024 information-bulletin instructions, which required candidates to select their category correctly, treated the information submitted as final, and barred changes after the correction window.

Relying on State of Tamil Nadu v. G. Hemalathaa, the Court held that examination instructions having the force of law must be strictly followed and cannot be modified or relaxed by the High Court under Article 226.

It also relied on The Chairperson, National Testing Agency v. Minor M. Vikram Balaji and B. Manjamma Devi v. Director General of Health Services concerning the refusal of late category changes after correction opportunities or counselling stages had passed.

The Court distinguished Dolly Chhanda v. Chairman, JEE, observing that correction of communal status in a national-level examination is not necessarily a minor or condonable mistake and may affect the selection process.

It further relied on B. Ajith Kumar v. Registrar General, High Court of Madras and Ran Vijay Singh v. State of U.P. for the principles that examination instructions bind candidates and that misplaced sympathy must not prejudice other candidates or disrupt the examination process.

The petitioners had failed to correct their category during either of the two opportunities provided, and they approached the Court only after the results had been declared.

The Court treated the bulletin’s restrictions as binding and concluded that allowing a post-result change from General to OBC could affect the All India merit and selection process, with consequences for other candidates.

It rejected reliance on Dolly Chhanda because a change in communal category in a national examination was not comparable to a minor, condonable error.

Nor did an earlier interim order in other appeals establish a precedent, as those appeals had ultimately been disposed of as infructuous.

It held that they were not entitled to change their category after the correction period and publication of results, and that the Court could not relax the applicable instructions to grant that relief.

All writ petitions were dismissed; there was no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.