A Class XII student has raised questions over the Central Board of Secondary Education’s (CBSE’s) procurement process for its on-screen marking (OSM) project, alleging that several eligibility, technical, and security requirements were revised, all of which made it possible for Coempt Eduteck Pvt Ltd. to bid for, and eventually win, the contract.
The allegations have been made in a blog by Sarthak Sidhant, a student from the 2025–26 batch who said he was one of the many students affected by the OSM system. He reviewed hundreds of CBSE tender documents, tracking changes across three versions of the tender.
According to Sidhant, the tender was first issued in February 2025, followed by a second round in May after the initial process failed to move forward. He claims that four companies, including Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) and Coempt Eduteck, participated in the May round, but all were disqualified during the technical evaluation stage.
A third tender was issued in August 2025, following which Coempt emerged as the successful bidder.
Sidhant alleges that a series of revisions introduced between the second and third tenders collectively made it easier for Coempt to qualify.
What is Coempt Eduteck, the firm in the eye of the storm?
According to the company’s “About Us” page, it is an education technology company that provides examination and assessment solutions to certificate-awarding bodies. Its offerings include platforms such as OneX, Onmark, EzyTest, and DigiTab, which are designed to support various examination processes.
The company provides services across different stages of the examination cycle, including pre-examination activities, question paper management, online examinations, answer-book digitisation, digital evaluation, and post-examination processes.
Changes to eligibility criteria during tender revisions
Among the changes highlighted in the analysis is the alleged removal of clauses disqualifying companies with a history of abandoning projects, failing to complete contracts, or facing financial weakness. He also claims that a provision barring firms that had been “blacklisted earlier” was revised to apply only to entities that were “currently blacklisted”. This allowed Coempt to bid for the contract, since it had changed its name from Globarena and, thus, had no ‘blacklist’ rulings against it.
According to the analysis, software maturity requirements were also relaxed. Earlier tenders reportedly required Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Level 5 certification, while later versions accepted Level 3 certification, which Sidhant claims matched Coempt’s capabilities.
The blog further alleges that experience requirements were also revised. Earlier versions reportedly required bidders to have handled projects involving at least five lakh students, while the final tender shifted emphasis to cumulative answer-book volumes across multiple projects. Sidhant argues that this favoured firms with several smaller contracts.
Security and accountability concerns
Other changes cited in the analysis include allowing third-party cloud infrastructure instead of bidder-owned data centres and disaster recovery centres, and removing a requirement that bidders own or control the complete source code of their software platforms.
Sidhant also alleges that accountability and quality-control provisions were weakened. According to the report, a corrigendum issued shortly before bid submission removed CBSE’s power to blacklist the vendor for major software failures. The final tender allegedly dropped a 0.5 per cent error-rate threshold and shifted penalties away from scanning errors towards project delays.
The analysis additionally raises questions over compliance with security requirements. Sidhant claims the tender required vulnerability assessment and penetration testing certification before deployment, but points to vulnerabilities recently identified in the platform by an independent security researcher as grounds for further scrutiny.
Based on his findings, Sidhant has called for an independent review of the procurement process, including the changes made to eligibility and technical requirements before the contract was awarded.
CBSE dry run also flagged concerns before OSM rollout
Concerns about the on-screen marking (OSM) system had been identified before its nationwide deployment for the 2026 Class 12 board examinations, Hindustan Times reported on Saturday. An internal observation report prepared after a dry run conducted at five Delhi schools in January 2026 flagged at least 36 technical, operational, and evaluation-related issues.
According to the report, evaluators raised concerns about the possibility of “blind or superficial checking” of answer scripts, reduced supervisory oversight, and the absence of safeguards against data loss. The report also noted that the digital evaluation process did not provide opportunities for examiners to discuss discrepancies or arrive at a consensus on marks, a feature available in conventional evaluation systems.
The report also suggested that several aspects of the platform required further refinement, even as the board proceeded with its implementation for one of India’s largest school examinations.
Source link
#Student #claims #CBSE #tender #tweaks #helped #Coempt #Eduteck #clinch #OSM #contract
