New Delhi: The National Testing Agency (NTA) Monday rejected a series of claims made by several NEET (UG) 2026 candidates regarding their OMR answer sheets and results, stating that the images circulating on social media were “digitally fabricated and did not match the official records”.
In a series of posts on X, the NTA said it had verified the records of multiple candidates, including Avaneesh Srivastava, Abhay Yadav, Lakshya Singh and Arya Singh, and found that the scores declared by the agency were accurate.
Regarding OMR-related claims for NEET (UG) 2026 being circulated on social media, it may be noted that the genuine OMR of every candidate concerned is on record with NTA. It was made available on the candidate portal and emailed to the candidates at the time of the OMR Response… pic.twitter.com/rN3r21c4hf
— National Testing Agency (@NTA_Exams) July 20, 2026
Referring to Avaneesh Srivastava (Application No. 260411198880, Roll No. 2001805051), the NTA said: “The genuine OMR of the candidate is on file. It was also emailed to him at the registered e-mail address during the OMR Response Key challenge window.”
The agency said the original OMR bore the candidate’s correct personal details, signature, thumb impression and the signatures of invigilators.
It further stated: “The image being circulated is not an OMR sheet issued by NTA. The identity inserted into that image (‘Ajeet Singh, son of Shri Lakhan Singh and Smt. Reena Singh’) does not correspond to any candidate registered for NEET (UG) 2026.”
According to the NTA, the viral image was “a digitally regenerated version of the candidate’s own genuine OMR sheet”, in which identity fields had been overwritten using AI or OCR-based tools. The agency said Avaneesh Srivastava’s score of 337 marks had been verified and remained unchanged.
In another post concerning Abhay Yadav (Application No. 260411367191), the NTA rejected the candidate’s public claim that only five questions had been left unanswered and that he deserved 634 marks.
“The candidate has stated publicly that only 5 questions were left unattempted and that the result should be 634 marks. This is not supported by the record. Of 180 questions, 44 were left unattempted. The OMR and the calculation sheet on file are mutually consistent.”
Also Read : Court sends 10 NEET-UG paper leak accused to judicial custody till July 11
The agency said Abhay Yadav’s score of 164 marks had been verified and stood as declared.
Responding to claims made by Lakshya Singh (Application No. 260412053016), the NTA said the circulated OMR sheet had been digitally manipulated.
“The image being circulated shows response markings that are not present on the genuine sheet. Additional bubbles have been shaded in by digital means to create a forged OMR sheet.”
The NTA said Lakshya Singh had attempted 54 of the 180 questions, answering 34 correctly and 20 incorrectly, while leaving 126 questions unattempted. His score of 116 marks was verified, it added.
The agency also dismissed allegations made by Arya Singh (Application No. 260410434102), saying the circulated OMR image had been altered.
“The image being circulated is a digitally altered version of that same sheet. The recorded time of signature of one of the invigilators has been changed from 3:45 PM on the genuine sheet to 2:45 PM on the altered image. There are several other markings of digital alteration on the forged OMR sheet.”
The NTA said Arya Singh’s score of 167 marks had also been verified and remained unchanged.
In a separate post addressing the wider controversy, the agency said: “Regarding OMR-related claims for NEET (UG) 2026 being circulated on social media, it may be noted that the genuine OMR of every candidate concerned is on record with NTA… The images being circulated as the ‘correct’ OMR are digitally fabricated. They are not documents issued by NTA.”
The agency warned that “Creating or circulating a forged OMR answer sheet is an offence under the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024,” adding that action could be taken against those involved in generating or sharing such forged documents.
