CBSE, meanwhile, strongly defended OSM, describing it as a technology-backed reform meant to ‘improve accuracy’, ‘transparency’ and ‘uniformity’ in evaluation.

But for thousands of students and parents, something was amiss; the incongruity between how their wards recalled taking the exam and how they actually scored sparked a controversy that went beyond lower marks, as more would be revealed in the next few days.

In the days since results were declared on May 19, amid repeated glitches on CBSE’s portal for accessing answer books, students shared that the process of applying for and receiving scanned copies became a struggle.

READ | Hit by tech glitches in its post-result services portal, CBSE to take help from two IITs

And when the board finally shared the scanned answer sheets, social media was flooded with complaints alleging blurred, unreadable pages, unchecked answers, missing portions, incorrect step-marking, evaluation inconsistencies, and, in some cases, even answer books allegedly belonging to someone else.

Mix-up of answer-sheets

One such case that drew significant attention was that of Vedant, a Class 12 student who claimed that the Physics answer sheet uploaded under his roll number did not belong to him. According to the posts and images he shared over his social media, the handwriting and responses in the scanned copy did not match his own writing — something he claims that both his parents, as well as school teachers, accepted. He compared the Physics answer booklet with his English and Computer Science papers, as well as personal notes, to demonstrate the mismatch and demanded that CBSE investigate the alleged mix-up.

On late Monday evening, CBSE accepted the goof-up and shared the original sheets with Vedant.

However, the matter is not sorted out for most candidates. Riya (name changed), a student from Lucknow, also shared with the indianexpress.com images of her scanned answer books — which had blurred pages. She shared that her plans for applying to JEE Main 2027 and even getting into an NIT will now be difficult with only marginal marks missing from the minimum eligibility for JEE Advanced and admission to IITs, NITs, and other prominent engineering institutes.

She has now planned to take a drop year, and reappear in improvement exams, or appear next year in three of her core subjects as a private candidate.

One of the blurred pages shared by Riya

But Riya’s case is not unique. Earlier, indianexpress.com also reported that students who achieved high percentiles in the JEE Main are facing potential disqualification from IIT and NIT admissions due to failing to meet the mandatory 75% score in CBSE Class 12 exams.

Students point out discrepancies in evaluation

Another student, Krish Paswan, alleged discrepancies in the evaluation of the CBSE Class 12 Physics (042) answer sheet. In a detailed social media post, the student claimed that although nine MCQs in Section A were correctly answered according to the official marking scheme, marks were awarded for only three. The student specifically pointed to questions 29(D), 30(D), and 30(C), which, according to the official key, matched the responses written but were still marked incorrect. The post included screenshots of the OMR-style responses, the official marking scheme, and the final marks awarded, with the student demanding re-evaluation and accusing the process of inconsistency and unfair checking.

@cbseindia29 By marking scheme 9 MCQ are correct but they have corrected only 3.Qno29(D) and 30(D)are correct but they are not added the marks 30C is also correct but they have incorrected no step marking Why. who is responsible for this @EduMinOfIndia #CbseReEvalution #justice pic.twitter.com/kjODFqfEEI

— Krish Raaz (@krishpaswan13) May 23, 2026

Similar complaints have emerged across subjects, particularly Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics, the very subjects where students have claimed the marking appeared unusually strict this year.

In another instance, Sanjana, a Class 12 student, alleged a far more serious discrepancy. After receiving only 11 out of 70 in Chemistry theory, she applied for a photocopy of her evaluated answer script.

The criticism surrounding OSM had, in fact, begun even before results were announced. Teachers evaluating answer books had earlier complained of blurred scans, server crashes, unsaved corrections, and repeated technical disruptions. Some evaluators reportedly struggled to check more than a handful of answer sheets per day because scanned scripts were difficult to read and required repeated zooming.

A CBSE teacher from Lucknow had earlier told indianexpress.com that evaluator training for such a large-scale shift could have started much earlier, ideally in the middle of the academic term last year, once the board had decided to implement the feature. Teachers had also questioned whether the rushed rollout left enough room for familiarisation with digital checking tools and standardised evaluation protocols.

‘OSM main gain in calculation’

However, not all evaluators viewed the system negatively. Madhusmita Dash, Dean of Commerce and Humanities at SAI International School, who served as a Head Examiner during the evaluation process, described the experience as “easy and comfortable.” The main gain, she said, was in calculation. “We just had to give the marks and it would get calculated and totalled. A lot of time was saved and calculation errors were less,” she said.

Also Read | ‘Portal working, but payment not reflecting’: CBSE Class 12th answer-book copy glitch

Workload and hours remained comparable to the traditional system — roughly 20–25 copies a day over eight-hour shifts — though she noted the screen time took a toll. “You have to keep looking at the screen for 7–8 hours continuously for 10–15, 20 days. That was exhausting in that manner.”

‘Full-scale rollout had exposed gaps’

Dash acknowledged that the first full-scale rollout had exposed gaps. The most concrete issue she flagged was missing scanned pages. “Suppose someone has got after the 11th page, then we are not having the 12th and 13th — it is going to 14th. So the answers written on those two pages have been marked as NA,” she said, adding that the problem likely originated at the scanning stage. “If the teacher had seen, we would have rejected the copies. But evaluators were seeing the answers, the question numbers — if pages were not scanned, they would not know.” At her centre, which processed 1,587 copies, 19 were rejected and rescanned. “It was not a huge number, but these glitches did happen,” she said.

On students reportedly receiving someone else’s answer sheets, she called it an expected friction of first-year implementation. “Every new system will have errors. Next year, it will be much more refined and systematic,” she said.

3 key ways to improve evaluation efficiency

CBSE, however, has consistently defended the OSM system and outlined three key ways in which it claimed the process would improve evaluation efficiency. First, the board said the system would prevent rushed evaluation by monitoring the pace at which evaluators moved through answer scripts and flagging instances where pages were clicked through too quickly. Second, it would eliminate totalling and tabulation errors by automatically calculating marks entered by examiners. Third, it would ensure complete evaluation by preventing answer books from being submitted until every page had been viewed and assessed.

Yet, the complaints emerging from students appear to directly challenge those very assurances. If pages could not be submitted without being evaluated, students ask, how did unchecked answers allegedly slip through? If digital scanning ensured transparency, how did students receive answer sheets that they claimed were not theirs? And if automated systems were meant to reduce human error, why are students still reporting discrepancies in basic MCQ checking and step-marking?

CBSE has maintained that students dissatisfied with marks can apply for scanned copies, verification and re-evaluation under the newly structured grievance framework.