[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Aarush Jain vs National Testing Agency And Anr on 1 April, 2026
Author: Jasmeet Singh
Bench: Jasmeet Singh
$~39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 01.04.2026
+ W.P.(C) 3859/2026 & CM APPL. 18971/2026
AARUSH JAIN
.....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Tanya Agarwal Advocate and
Mr. Krishna Kumar Keshav Advocate
versus
NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY AND ANR.
.....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sanjay Khanna, SC for R1
Mr. Shashank Bajpai CGSC, Ms. Aashna Mehra,
Mr. Vatsal Tripathi, Mr. Govind Singh Chauhan,
Ms. Vaishnavstuti, Advs. for R2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
: JASMEET SINGH, J (ORAL)
1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking the following prayers:-
"a. For a writ, order or direction to Respondents to reopen the
fee payment facility/window so as to enable the petitioner -
Aarush Jain S/o Ravi Jain (Application No. 260310837798) to
pay the requisite fee for JEE (Main) Session 2 to be conducted
between 2nd April 2026 to 9th April 2026 in terms of public
notice dated 1.2.2026 and to accept the fee so paid with the
application form and to further immediately issue admit card
to the petitioner so as to enable him to appear for the said JEE
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
(Main) Session 2.
b. For a writ, order or direction to the Respondents to accept
payment of fee by Aarush Jain S/o Ravi Jain (Application No.
260310837798) through any other alternative mode such as
demand draft, NEFT/RTGS etc. for JEE (Main) Session 2 to be
conducted between 2nd April 2026 to 9th April 2026 in terms of
public notice dated 1.2.2026 and to further immediately issue
admit card to the petitioner so as to enable him to appear for
the said JEE (Main) Session 2. . . ."
2. The brief facts of the instant case are that the petitioner is a JEE
aspirant who passed his 12th board examination on 30.04.2025 and
scored 95% marks with the science stream. The respondent No. 1/NTA
issued a public notice dated 31.10.2025 inviting online application
forms for JEE (Main) - 2026 Session-1. The petitioner submitted
application form for the JEE (Main) - 2026 Session-1 and duly
appeared for the examination on 23.01.2026.
3. On 01.02.2026, the respondent No. 1 issued a public notice inviting
applications for JEE (Main) - 2026 Session-2 providing schedule for
application, fee payment and examination dates.
4. In pursuance of this notification, the petitioner desirous of appearing for
Session-2 immediately on 03.02.2026 filled the application form for the
said examination and made a payment of Rs. 1015.34/- towards
examination fee for JEE (Main) - 2026 Session-2 through net banking
via his father's bank account. The receipt generated thereof is important
and is reproduced hereunder:-
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
5. On 17.03.2026, the petitioner logged into JEE (Main) portal to check
the status of his admit card and the advance city intimation slip,
wherein he was shocked to notice that his application form fee is
pending and since it remained unpaid, his application was incomplete
and the petitioner was ineligible to participate in the JEE (Main) - 2026
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
Session-2 examination.
6. Numerous communications were exchanged between the petitioner and
the respondent No. 1 with regards to this issue but to no avail. Hence,
the present petition has been filed.
7. Ms. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the
petitioner immediately after the release of the public advertisement for
the aforesaid examination applied for participation by duly filling the
application form and also made payment of the application form fees on
03.02.2026 from his father's bank account for which the transaction
status was shown as "success".
8. It was only on 05.02.2026, that the aforesaid transaction for the
application form fee was reversed and therein the father of the
petitioner missed the said reversal of payment.
9. Mr. Khanna, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, opposes the
petition and at the outset states that the respondent No. 1 have highest
sympathy for the petitioners but are unable to help the petitioners. He
relies upon the JEE (MAIN) 2026 information bulletin and more
particularly serial Nos. (iv) and (v) of the same, to contend that the
terms of the brochure were clear with regards to the generation of
confirmation page which can only be generated after successful
payment of fees and an application form is only considered complete
when the confirmation page of the online application is generated. The
relevant Clauses of the information bulletin read as under:-
"(iv) The fee can be submitted only online through Net
Banking, Credit Card, Debit Card, or UPI Services.
Processing charges and GST as applicable are chargeable
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
from the candidate (in addition to the examination fee) by
the concerned Bank/Payment Gateway Integrator.
(v) The Confirmation Page of the online Application Form
for each session will be generated only after the successful
payment of the fee by the Candidate. In case the
Confirmation Page is not generated after payment of the fee,
then the candidate may have to approach the concerned
Bank/Payment Gateway (in the helpline numbers and email
given in Appendix - 1) to ensure the successful payment or to
obtain the refund of duplicate/multiple payments."
10. Therefore, in the present case, the confirmation page was not generated
and hence, there was no application form fee received by the
respondent No. 1 in pursuance of the application form filled by the
petitioner.
11. Additionally, Mr. Khanna, also draws my attention to paragraph No. 17
of the counter affidavit to state that allowing the present petition will
create logistical difficulties and confusion in the conduct of the
aforesaid examination. The paragraph No. 17 of the counter affidavit
reads as under:-
"17. That the present examination is a Computer-Based
Examination (CBT), wherein each candidate is allotted a
separate computer system to appear for the exam. That it
becomes logistically impossible to accommodate
people/candidates at the Eleventh hour, as there are
integrated operational and administrative arrangements
involved in doing the same. In light of the foregoing
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
submissions, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the writ petition
filed by the Respondent:
a. That the mode of payment of the application fee is
strictly online, wherein all data is centrally stored
electronically. The candidate registers using valid
identity proof, photograph and other related
documents upon successful authentication as per
procedure, the payment is captured and the fee is
automatically credited to the designated bank
account and all candidates' data is stored in the
central data base. The process does not have any
manual dependency or control.
b. It is submitted that upon successful receipt of
payment from the JEE (Main) 2026 Session-2
aspirants, the bank has duly furnished the
reconciliation details to Respondent No. 1. If the
Respondent no. 1 accepts the payment from any
candidate at this stage, the bank would be required to
correlate the same with the financial records of the
candidates' database.
c. That after due checking and verification of records,
including the removal of duplicate candidates, the
entire data pertaining to JEE (Main) 2026 Session-2
examination has been duly frozen and the
examination city intimation has been communicated
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
to all the candidates. It is further submitted that on
29.03.2026, the Respondent No. 1 has also issued the
Admit Cards to the candidates for the examination
scheduled to be held on 02 and 04 April 2026.
d. That if the petitioner is allowed, the Respondent
No. 1 cannot verify the photo authentication process
and Aadhar verification of the Petitioner and will
have to make an exception for the petitioner which
needs to be deliberated.
e. That in the event any candidate is permitted to
make payment at this stage, the Respondent would be
compelled to undertake the entire exercise of
verification of all candidates' records, including
scrutiny for duplicate applications which is not
possible. It is submitted that without reopening the
portal, Respondent No. 1 is unable to verify the
candidates' data. In this regard, it is further
submitted that Respondent No. 1 has already issued
the admit cards and city intimation details to all
candidates.
f. That it is submitted that the Petitioner appeared in
JEE (Main) 2026 Session 1 examination on
23.01.2026 at iON Digital Zone iDZ Kuberpur, Dev
Technical Campus, Kuberpur, Agra, Uttar Pradesh,
and secured 86.6671400 percentile. Thus, it is evident
that the Petitioner has not suffered the loss of an
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
entire academic year. The Petitioner may appear for
JEE (Main) in the subsequent examination. The final
score will be given to the Petitioner as per his
performance in Session -1.
g. That if this Hon'ble Court allows the Petitioner at
this stage, the same would result in grave prejudice
and would be unjust to numerous other candidates
who were unable to submit the fee/application form
within the stipulated time.
h. That if the Hon'ble Court permit to pay the
application fee to the Petitioner, the same would set
an undesirable precedent for all other candidates."
12. Mr. Khanna, also submits that the petitioner had participated in
Session- 1 of the JEE(Main), wherein a confirmation page was duly
generated and hence, it cannot be said that the petitioner was unaware
of the procedure. Additionally, the payment refund was initiated on the
second day itself i.e. 04.02.2026 and hence, the petitioner ought to have
been vigilant.
13. It is also stated by Mr. Khanna that the respondent No. 1 issued another
public notice dated 12.03.2026 giving another opportunity to the
candidates who could not complete their application forms in time by
reopening the portal and giving period from 12.03.2026 (Afternoon) to
13.03.2026 (11:50 P.M) to make the requisite fee payment. The
petitioner failed to make the payment during this scheduled timeline as
well.
14. He further draws my attention to the judgment of the Hon'ble Division
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
Bench of this Court in Sadhana Yadav v. Union of India, 2025 SCC
OnLine Del 4279. The relevant paragraphs of the same read as under:-
"16. However, while bearing in mind the factors addressed
by the ld. Counsels for the parties, the Court cannot lose
sight of the discipline that is required to be maintained in
the conduct of such examinations. The conduct of
examinations has a sanctity attached to it and it is common
knowledge that owing to the conditions generally relating to
any unforeseen circumstances including transportation,
traffic etc. candidates may reach late. Therefore, the
information bulletin dated 1st March, 2025, published by the
NTA and the admit card issued to the candidates gave very
specific instructions in clause 8.1 and 8.2 of the information
bulletin read as under:
"8.1 Candidates are advised to report at the
Examination Centre well in time i.e. 02 hours before
the commencement of the examination.
8.2 Candidates should take their seats immediately
after the opening of the Examination Hall. If the
candidates do not report in time due to any reason i.e.
traffic jam, train/bus delay, etc., they are likely to miss
some of the important instructions to be announced in
the Examination Rooms/Halls. The NTA shall not be
responsible for any delay."
17. The above stated Clauses, stipulate that candidates have
to report in time i.e., two hours before the commencement of
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
examination which in this case would be 7 am. The NTA is
conscious of the fact that students could be coming from
far-off places and thus, a sufficient margin is provided by
opening the gates at 7am itself i.e., two hours before the
examination. Apart from the general stipulation, clause 8.2
also specifically cautions candidates that there could be
traffic jams, train/bus delays etc., which may prevent them
from reaching in time. Candidates are asked to take their
seats when the Examination hall opens at 7am. When read
with the instructions stipulated in the admit card it is clear
that there is no conflict whatsoever. The opening time of the
gate of the examination centre is 07:00 A.M. for an exam
which is to be held at 09:00 A.M. The candidates are
expected to enter the examination hall and take their seat
before the examination commences. This would, however,
not mean that the candidate can enter at his or her own
volition and timing. The admit card is clear to the effect that
the gate opening time i.e., reporting entry time at the centre
is 07:00 A.M. and the gate closing time is 08:30 A.M.
Between 07:00 A.M. and 08:30 A.M., whenever the
candidate enters, the candidate shall be permitted to take
his or her seat in the examination hall.
18. Thus, in the opinion of this Court, Clause 8.2 of the
information bulletin does not appear to be in conflict with
the instructions in the admit card and the argument to that
effect would not be tenable.
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
19. The Court at first blush may be persuaded to take a
sympathetic view in these kinds of matters, as the career of
a young girl who is on the verge of entering higher studies
could be jeopardised. However, the same would not be
sufficient by itself to give directions to the NTA, which has a
great responsibility of smooth and peaceful conduct of
examinations for more than 13.54 lacs students, while
maintaining discipline and also ensuring that the same is
uniformly enforced across the country.
....
21. The CUET is an important entrance examination and
the discipline in arriving at the examination hall in time,
taking the seat in time and being at the centre before the
gate closing time, are all part of the discipline and ethos of
the examination ecosystem which ought not to be relaxed,
inasmuch as, the same may lead to huge inequities between
similarly placed students. One may actually feel that
nothing would have happened had the student been given
entry as she was only six minutes late. If the said decision to
let her in was taken by the concerned Invigilator or
Supervisor, on the spot, it would have been fine. However,
the authorities cannot be blamed for enforcing the rule of
gate closing timings strictly.
22. Coming to the argument made by the Appellant that
there would be discrimination as there may not be uniform
implementation of the instructions in the admit card as also
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
the information bulletin, such discrimination cannot be
considered as a valid ground to interfere, inasmuch as, all
students who violate the gate closing time, would be acting
contrary to the instructions. Article 14 of the Constitution
cannot be applied to compare persons violating the rules of
the examination.
23. When students act contrary to the instructions of any
given examination, such students cannot argue, inter se,
discrimination in the opinion of this Court. Therefore, the
ld. Single Judge's view that a lenient view cannot be taken
in such matters does not warrant any interference. In the
conduct of such a large-scale examination, leniency would
lead to chaos and, therefore, the discipline of the
examination ought to be maintained.
....
25. The CUET UG examination is an exam where more
than 13.54 lacs students from across the country appear. If
exceptions are made, and discipline is not followed in such
an exam, the timely conduct of the exam, the timely
announcement of results and timely admission to colleges
and Universities is all likely to be jeopardised and there
would be a cascading effect. In such matters, the
interference by the Court should be the least."
15. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
available on record.
16. In the present case, the payment receipt shows that the payment was
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
made by the petitioner and the transaction status was reflected as
"success". Subsequently, an amount of Rs. 1015.34/- was also deducted
from the bank account of the petitioner's father on 03.02.2026. Hence,
the non-payment is not on account of petitioner's fault and the same
cannot be attributed to the petitioner, at best it can only be termed as a
technical irregularity.
17. The fact which is vehemently contended by the respondent No. 1 to
oppose the present petition, that the confirmation page was not
generated is also to my mind a procedural irregularity.
18. A perusal of the petition also shows that when a candidate applies for
JEE (Main) - 2026 Session-1, an application number is generated. It is
the same application number which is carried through to the second
session and only on payment of fee for Session-2, the petitioner
becomes eligible to appear in the Session-2 of the said examination.
The application number remains same for both the sessions.
19. The petitioner though should have been cautious with respect to his
application form and should have seen the generation of a confirmation
page, but the fact that the petitioner had duly paid the application form
fee, even though the same was not credited to the respondent's account,
cannot be said to be the fault of the petitioner.
20. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment titled Farzana Batool v.
Union of India, (2024) 15 SCC 818, has made the following
categorical observations with respect to the right to pursue higher
education:
"10. Given that the issue raised in this case concerns access
to education, albeit at the professional level, we would like
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
to take this opportunity to underscore the importance of
creating an enabling environment to make it possible for
students such as the petitioners to pursue professional
education. While the right to pursue higher (professional)
education has not been spelt out as a fundamental right in
Part III of the Constitution, it bears emphasis that access to
professional education is not a governmental largesse.
Instead, the State has an affirmative obligation to facilitate
access to education, at all levels."
(Emphasis supplied)
21. In this view of the matter, the Court under this extraordinary
jurisdiction is required to ensure substantive justice, a mere procedural
or technical irregularity cannot defeat the notion of substantive justice
which leans in favour of the petitioner especially when the right to
pursue higher/professional education of the petitioner is at stake. The
petitioner in this situation when he is not at fault cannot be left in the
lurch and cannot be penalized for no fault attributable to him.
22. The reliance placed by the respondent No. 1 on the judgment of
Sadhana Yadav (supra) is also misconceived and not applicable to the
factual matrix of the present case as in Sadhana Yadav (supra), the
candidate reached the examination centre beyond the stipulated time
and hence, there was a delay clearly attributable to the candidate, which
is not the case in the present petition.
23. In the present case the petitioner duly applied on 03.02.2026
immediately after the date of issuance of the public notice inviting
applications and the transaction receipt for the application form fee also
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
reflected the status of payment as "success", the requisite amount was
duly debited from the bank account of the petitioner's father and hence,
it cannot be said that the petitioner is at fault in assuming that his
application was duly accepted by the respondent No. 1.
24. I am of the view, that logistical issues as highlighted by the learned
counsel for the respondent No. 1, cannot take precedence or come in
the way of giving an opportunity to a candidate in participating in an
examination as important such as JEE, which is a dream for a lot of
students in our Country. The same would not only result in penalization
of the candidate when he is not at fault but also would result in
defeating the right of the petitioner.
25. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.
26. The respondent shall take necessary steps to facilitate the petitioner to
participate in the JEE (MAIN)-2026 Session-2 on any of the scheduled
dates and centre convenient to the respondent No. 1 by giving a notice
24 hours prior in writing to the petitioner.
27. The procedural formalities shall also be completed by the petitioner
immediately.
28. The counter-affidavit and rejoinder handed over in Court today are
taken on record.
29. Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
JASMEET SINGH, J
APRIL 1, 2026 / (MS)
(corrected and released on 01.04.2026)
By:MAYANK
Signing Date:02.04.2026
12:48:59
