November 29, 2025 v. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 RITU CWP-34068-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : November 29, 2025 -PETITIONER V/S NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY -RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Ankur Sidhar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Gosain, Advocate for the respondent. *** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner, who intends to appear in the UGC-NET examination scheduled for December 2025, made bona fide and strenuous efforts to submit her online application form on the last date prescribed for such submissions. However, despite attempting the process more than 10 times, she was unable to complete the submission owing to a technical glitch, and resultantly, she immediately reported this issue to the authority concerned before the expiry of the stipulated deadline. Having received no favourable response, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking directions to the respondent- National Testing Agency to permit her to complete and submit her application form even after the prescribed last date. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s bona fide stands fortified by the fact that she repeatedly attempted to register and submit her application form but was prevented from doing so solely due to a technical malfunction at the end of the respondent’s portal. To substantiate this argument, he has drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure R-3, relied DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-34068-2025 (O&M) 2 upon by the respondent, depicting that the petitioner accessed the portal 12 times between 12:23 PM (on 07.11.2025) and 23:07 PM (on 09.11.2025) and
Legal Reasoning
attempted submission of application form, from different operating systems. Moreover, reference is also made to the screenshot (Annexure P-5), to submit that the registration portal of the respondent was not responding. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent’s denial of the possibility of any technical glitch at its end rests solely upon an email dated 15.11.2025 from NIC (responsible for operating the portal), which states that the portal was functioning properly and no complaint had been received. It is contended, however, that the petitioner had reported the issue promptly by email sent at 20:56 on 07.11.2025, and this is undisputed, as the respondent replied on 12.11.2025 without first consulting NIC regarding the grievance. Emphasis is also placed on Annexure P-6, wherein becomes enclosed the screenshot of petitioner’s email dated 07.11.2025 along with an attachment file of screen recording demonstrating the steps undertaken by her to submit the application within the prescribed timeframe, however, remained unsuccessful due to technical error, as the respondent’s portal was not responding to various commands. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the petitioner’s prayer primarily on the ground that allowing such relief would open the floodgates, resulting in repeated requests for extension of time from various candidates. 5. Advancing arguments on merits, learned counsel for the respondent submits that, by a public notice dated 04.11.2025, the respondent issued an advisory requesting applicants to complete the UGC-NET December 2025 application process before the registration portal’s closure at 11:50 PM DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-34068-2025 (O&M) 3 on 07.11.2025, as earlier notified on 07.10.2025. The relevant extract of the advisory is reproduced hereunder:- “The registration portal for the UGC-NET December 2025 examination shall be closing on 07 November 2025 (up to 11:50 PM). All candidates who have not yet completed the process are once again advised to ensure that they: 1. Fill and submit the online application form paying the prescribed examination fee. 2. Download and retain the confirmation page for future reference. It is reiterated that only candidates who have successfully paid the fee will be considered as having completed the application process. Candidates are also advised to check their particular carefully before fee payment as no change shall be permitted later. Candidates are further advised to regularly visit the NTA website (https://ugcnet.nta.nic.in) for the latest updates, notices, and information regarding the UGC-NET December 2025 examination.” 6. It is further submitted that the portal remained operational for 32 days, i.e. from 07.10.2025 to 07.11.2025 (up to 11:50 PM). Despite ample advance notice, the petitioner took no steps until the last moment, thereby leaving insufficient time to complete the multi-stage registration process. It is asserted that, apart from the advisory, the respondent also issued targeted email alerts on 05.11.2025 to 1,71,034 candidates who had initiated but not completed their applications, urging them to finalize and submit the same. 7. Refuting the allegation of any technical malfunction or glitch on the part of the respondent, learned counsel for the respondent submits that approximately 1,42,830 candidates successfully registered on 07.11.2025, out of which 1,10,303 candidates registered between 12:00 PM and 11:50 PM on that very day. It is contended that if any technical issue had existed, similar complaints would have been received from other candidates, however, no such DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-34068-2025 (O&M) 4 grievance has been reported by even a single candidate. 8. It is lastly argued by learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has not produced any metadata-verified system logs, timestamps, or server error codes, rendering the claim a factual dispute, which cannot be adjudicated in the present proceedings. It is further contended that the screenshots relied upon by the petitioner bear no timestamps and may have been generated after closure of the portal, particularly since complete
Decision
application form has not been annexed with the writ petition. 9. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 10. Notwithstanding the factual controversies raised by the respondent, this Court finds no reason to disbelieve the petitioner, especially in view of the respondent’s own admission that the petitioner attempted the submission of her application form 12 times from different IP addresses. Moreover, the e-mail dated 15.11.2025 received from the NIC speaks that during the registration process, the application was functioning properly and no issues were being reported, whereas, the petitioner reported the issue promptly by sending e-mail at 20:56 on 07.11.2025, and as such, the respondent even failed to report the said issue to the NIC. Furthermore, the petitioner’s grievance enclosed in the e-mail (supra) was rejected vide response e-mail dated 12.11.2025 without even contacting the NIC regarding the same. Consequently, the respondent’s asserted possibility of a technical glitch attributable to the petitioner appears implausible. 11. This Court is cognizant of the respondent’s contention that deadlines prescribed for submission of online application forms must be strictly adhered to. However, given that the petitioner made bona fide and repeated DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-34068-2025 (O&M) 5 efforts to submit her application form within the stipulated timeframe but was unable to do so due to circumstances beyond her control, she cannot be made to suffer. The petitioner does not seek any undue advantage, rather she merely seeks permission to appear in the examination. The respondent-agency, having created the portal, is under an obligation to ensure its proper functioning until the stipulated deadline, and no candidate can be prejudiced due to technical shortcomings of the portal. 12. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent is directed to permit the petitioner to submit her application form, either through the online portal or through physical mode. In view of the fact that the examination is scheduled for 31.12.2025, sufficient time remains for the respondent to rectify the issue, and no prejudice will be caused to the ongoing examination process. The petitioner shall approach the competent authority within five working days, whereupon the latter shall take necessary action. 13. It is clarified that the direction (supra) has been passed taking into account the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and the same shall not be construed as a precedent. 14. Pending application stands disposed of accordingly. November 29, 2025 devinder (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.02 15:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment