Since emerging as one of the top voices to flag possible glaring issues surrounding CBSE's OSM system, Sidhant has also emerged as an unlikely social media favourite for his sharp and often savage replies to trolls on X. Sarthak Sidhant, 17-year-old student, met Rahul Gandhi on June 2 (X/@RahulGandhi)Who is Sarthak Sidhant Sarthak Sidhant, 17, published his findings at his website, sarthaksidhant.com/coempt, after, according to him, spending several days reviewing tender documents on the Central Public Procurement portal.
This came after a fall in CBSE pass percentage led to questions over the OSM system, and some students reported errors, mismatch and mix-ups.
Sidhant was on Tuesday asked to appear before Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports.
According to people familiar with his presentation cited in an earlier HT report, Sidhant told the committee that CBSE had floated three separate tenders for the OSM system.
Sidhant's X replies, shoutout for journalist Over the past few days, Sidhant's posts and one-line responses have gone viral, particularly as news channels and portals began competing over "exclusive" reporting linked to the issue originally flagged by CBSE students and later pursued through detailed reporting by very few.
As the controversy surrounding Central Board of Secondary Education's (CBSE) On-Screen Marking (OSM) system tender process snowballed online, 17-year-old student Sarthak Sidhant appeared before a parliamentary panel on Tuesday and presented a detailed account of the procurement process and alleged irregularities he claimed to have identified in official documents.
Since emerging as one of the top voices to flag possible glaring issues surrounding CBSE's OSM system, Sidhant has also emerged as an unlikely social media favourite for his sharp and often savage replies to trolls on X. Sarthak Sidhant, 17-year-old student, met Rahul Gandhi on June 2 (X/@RahulGandhi)
Who is Sarthak Sidhant Sarthak Sidhant, 17, published his findings at his website, sarthaksidhant.com/coempt, after, according to him, spending several days reviewing tender documents on the Central Public Procurement portal. This came after a fall in CBSE pass percentage led to questions over the OSM system, and some students reported errors, mismatch and mix-ups.
Sidhant's blog, titled ‘How CBSE rewrote rules to favour Coempt EduTeck’, alleged that the board systematically modified eligibility and technical requirements across three successive tender rounds in a manner that benefited the eventual winning vendor, Hyderabad-based Coempt EduTeck Private Limited.
“This is a story of how a massive public institution deliberately played with students' futures by rewriting its own rulebook,” Sidhant wrote in his blog's opening.
The company denied any wrongdoing, so did the CBSE.
Sidhant was on Tuesday asked to appear before Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports. According to people familiar with his presentation cited in an earlier HT report, Sidhant told the committee that CBSE had floated three separate tenders for the OSM system. The first, issued in February 2025, was eventually cancelled without a successful bidder. The second, issued in May 2025, received four bids but was not awarded. The third, floated in August 2025, attracted bids from Rankguru, TCS and Coempt, with the contract ultimately going to Coempt after Rankguru failed to qualify the technical stage.
Sidhant's X replies, shoutout for journalist Over the past few days, Sidhant's posts and one-line responses have gone viral, particularly as news channels and portals began competing over "exclusive" reporting linked to the issue originally flagged by CBSE students and later pursued through detailed reporting by very few.
In one widely shared reply, Sidhant came out in support of Hindustan Times reporter Sanjay Maurya after a user accused media outlets of "stealing credit" from students who first raised concerns.
"Sanjay is doing actual exclusives. He is doing actual investigative journalism," Sidhant wrote in response to a post that had accused the HT journalist of not crediting "the actual guys that did the investigative journalism".
