Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
M. R. SHAH, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission – Appellant
Versus
Miss Hage Mamung – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
M.R. Shah, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 10.02.2022 passed by the Gauhati High Court (Itanagar Bench) in Writ Appeal No.12/2019, by which the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by respondent No.1 herein and has directed the Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the ’Public Service Commission’) for re-evaluation of the papers of respondent No.1 and respondent No.4 herein by quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 05.10.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 62/2018, the Public Service Commission has preferred the present appeal.
2. The facts leading to the present appeal in a nutshell are as under:
That the Public Service Commission issued an advertisement on 21.09.2016 for filling up of 22 posts of Agriculture Development Officer. Respondent Nos.1, 4 and 5 herein applied for the said posts
Appointment – Re-evaluation of answer-sheets of written examination cannot be ordered without any concrete reason.
Point of Law : if a statute, Rule or Regulation governing an examination does not permit re-evaluation or scrutiny of an answer sheet (as distinct from prohibiting it) then the Court may permit re-ev....
Point of Law : Practice of calling for answer scripts/answer sheets and thereafter to order re-evaluation and that too in absence of any specific provision in relevant rules for re-evaluation and tha....
Candidates must not suffer due to administrative negligence in examination evaluations, and proper procedures must be followed to ensure fair assessment.
Judicial review in matters of academic evaluation is limited, and courts should defer to expert opinions unless there are specific provisions allowing for re-evaluation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article