Krithik Kumar v. The Director General
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Krithik Kumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The Director General, National Testing Agency, First Floor, NSIC-MDBP Building, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi- 110 020.
2.The Director (Exams), National Testing Agency, First Floor, NSIC-MDBP Building, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110 020.
..Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to re-evaluate the petitioner's answer sheet of the second session of joint entrance examination bearing roll No.TN020100831 and to declare the correct percentages of marks by considering the representation in the form of an e-mail dated 05.05.2026 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.K.Myilsamy For Respondent(s):
Mrs.Sunita Kumari Standing Counsel For R1 and R2
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to re-evaluate petitioner's answer sheet of the second session of joint entrance examination bearing roll No.TN020100831 and to declare the correct percentages of marks by considering petitioner's representation in the form of an e-mail dated 05.05.2026, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. It is submitted by learned Standing Counsel for respondents that mandamus itself ought not to be entertained inasmuch as petitioner's request for revaluation cannot be entertained nor does he have any kind of a right to seek revaluation or rechecking of results and in this regard, learned Standing Counsel for respondents would place reliance upon the Information Bulletin-2026 of National Testing Agency JEE (MAIN) 2026. Its states as under:
"There shall be no re-evaluation/re-checking of the result. No correspondence in this regard shall be entertained."
3. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that they were two sessions, the marks scored in the two sessions are at great variance which
legitimately makes him believe that evaluation was done erroneously.
4. Though this Court sympathises with petitioner, however in view of the above Bulletin, petitioner has not been able to show any right to seek revaluation. It is trite that a mandamus would lie only when there is a right which is established and a corresponding obligation, which the petitioner despite repeated queries was unable to establish.
5. In view thereof, writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 22-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MRN To 1.The Director General, National Testing Agency, First Floor, NSIC-MDBP Building, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi- 110 020.
2.The Director (Exams), National Testing Agency, First Floor, NSIC-MDBP Building, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110 020.
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
MRN 22-06-2026