CBSE OSM Tender Controversy: CBSE’s On-Screen Marking (OSM) system, which affects the board exam results of millions of students across the country, is surrounded by serious controversies these days. This controversy has not been started by any political party or investigating agency, but by a 17-year-old student from Jharkhand. This student named Sarthak Siddhant has claimed that CBSE made changes in many important rules while issuing the tender for OSM system, due to which a particular company benefited.

The student’s allegations became so big that opposition leaders, many political parties and people associated with the education sector have also started raising questions on this matter. Now this matter is not limited to the tender process, but the debate has also started on the future of lakhs of students and the transparency of the examination system. In such a situation, let us know whether CBSE had manipulated the tender process for OSM process and what big claim this 17 year old student made.

What are meaningful principles?

Sarthak Siddhant is a class 12 student from Jharkhand. He has declared himself among the students affected by the OSM system. After not being happy with his exam result and answer sheet, he started studying the CBSE tender documents available on the Central Public Procurement Portal (CPPP). After comparing different tender documents for several days, he posted his findings in the form of a blog. He claims that he found about 15 such irregularities in the tender process, which raise questions.

Did CBSE manipulate the tender process for OSM process?

As of now, it is a matter of allegations and claims, which are demanding investigation and review. Sarthak Sidhanth, a 17-year-old student from Jharkhand, has claimed that CBSE made changes in some rules and eligibility conditions while issuing the tender for the On-Screen Marking (OSM) system, which allegedly gave an advantage to a particular company. In his blog, the student has pointed out the changes in many conditions like turnover, blacklisting, technical qualification and data centre. However, CBSE has rejected these allegations and said that the entire procurement process was done as per the prescribed government rules and procedures. At the same time, experts from Indian Institute of Technology Madras and Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur are doing technical investigation of this entire matter.

What big claim did this 17 year old student make?

1. First charge – Sarthak says that CBSE issued tenders for the OSM project thrice. According to him, the eligibility conditions were more stringent in the initial tenders, but later they were gradually eased. In such a situation, the biggest question has been raised regarding the turnover of the company. According to the final condition of the tender, the average annual turnover of the company for three years should have been at least Rs 50 crore. According to Sarthak, a big company like TCS could easily fulfill this condition. The turnover of Rankguru Technology Solutions was also quite high, whereas the average turnover of Coempt Edu Tech was only around Rs 50.86 crore. The student alleges that this limit was fixed in such a way that Coempt also becomes eligible.

2. Second charge – The second big allegation in Sarthak’s blog is Poor Performance. He says that in the initial tender, there was a provision to keep out such companies which had a bad record in the past or which had left the projects incomplete, but later this condition was changed. Sarthak claims that if the old conditions had remained in force, Coempt Edu Tech would not have been eligible.

3. Third charge – The student says that Coempt Edu Tech was earlier known as Globarena Technologies. Globarena’s name had surfaced in the Telangana Intermediate exam controversy in 2019 and it was also reportedly blacklisted. Sarthak alleges that the words ‘Currently Blacklisted’ were added in the tender instead of ‘Previously Blacklisted’. This change meant that a company which has been blacklisted before, but is not currently blacklisted, can participate in the tender. According to him, this change proved beneficial for Coempt.

4. Fourth charge – Sarthak has also questioned the change in technical standards. He claimed that the requirement of CMMI Certification Level-5 was reduced to Level-3. The standards related to scanning quality were also made softer than before. Important conditions like data center and disaster recovery center were also changed. He says that these changes gave Coempt an advantage compared to big companies.

Also read- NSUI protest at CBSE headquarters, demanding transparency in OSM evaluation system

How did CBSE respond?

CBSE has rejected these allegations. Board officials say that the entire procurement process was done as per government rules and all prescribed procedures were followed. According to CBSE, the changes made in the tender were not to benefit any particular company. The changes were made with the aim of removing the shortcomings of the previous round and achieving better results. The winning company was selected keeping in mind both quality and cost.

What did Coempt Edu Tech say?

The company has also denied any irregularities. Officials of Coempt Edu Tech say that the company participated in the tender as per the rules and fulfilled all the eligibility conditions. The company also says that the courts had not found it guilty in the Telangana examination controversy.

Also read- CUET UG 2026: Relief to students who could not take the exam despite biometrics, NTA will give second chance; New date announced soon

Education Loan Information:
Calculate Education Loan EMI