Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ANU SIVARAMAN, RAJESH RAI K.
Shruthi G., W/o. Satheesha G.A. – Appellant
Versus
Chethan K., S/o. Kariyappa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
These appeals are preferred against the common judgment dated 22.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.2185/2023 c/w. Writ Petitions No.2257/2023, 4572/2023 and 17481/2023 (S-RES). The Writ Petitions were filed by the candidates, who had appeared in the selection conducted for appointment of Junior Assistant Electrical in the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited ('KPTCL' for short).
2. We have heard Shri. P.S. Rajagopal, learned senior counsel as instructed by Shri. Jayanth Dev Kumar and Smt. Ashwini Rajagopal, learned Advocates, Smt. S. Susheela, learned senior counsel as instructed by Shri. Suhas. G, learned Advocate, Shri. Adithya Sondhi, learned senior counsel as instructed by Shri. Parashuram. A.L, learned Advocate, Shri. Kiran S. Javali, learned senior counsel as instructed by Shri. Srinivasan Rao C.N, learned Advocate, Smt. D.V. Nidhishree, learned counsel, Shri. Keshav. M. Datar, learned counsel, Shri. Halashetti Jagadish Sidramappa, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Shri. S.S. Naganand, learned senior counsel as instructed by Smt. Sumana Naganand, learned Advocate and Shri. A. Chandrachud, learned c
The KEA can amend finalized answer keys post-objection submissions if justified by substantial complaints, emphasizing the authority of expert committees in ensuring fairness in selection processes.
The court established that an expert committee's evaluation of answer keys in recruitment processes is presumptively correct, allowing judicial restraint unless glaring errors are evident.
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.
Judicial review of answer keys is limited; courts should not substitute their judgment for that of experts unless errors are clearly demonstrable.
The court reaffirmed that examination key answers should be presumed correct unless explicit evidence shows otherwise, emphasizing judicial restraint in academic matters.
Judicial review of examination answer keys is permissible only in exceptional cases where the key is demonstrably wrong, and the burden of proof lies with the candidates to show such error without in....
Re-evaluation of answer sheets is not a matter of right unless explicitly permitted by rules; fairness in evaluation must be upheld.
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
