MADHURESH PRASAD
Harshit Sharan – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Madhuresh Prasad, J.—These two writ petitions are raising identical issues in respect of the same procedure in relation to 67th Combined Preliminary Competitive Re-Examination (for short ‘the Preliminary Examination’). The learned counsels have, thus, submitted that the matter may be considered together.
2. Mr. Y.V.Giri, learned senior counsel, represents the petitioners in CWJC No. 17803 of 2022, whereas the petitioner of CWJC No. 17806 of 2022 is represented by learned counsel Mr. Suresh Kumar Ishwar. The respective learned counsels for State and BPSC have also made submission. The relief claimed by the parties in both the writ petitions are substantially based on a criticism of the answer key based on which result of the Preliminary Examination has been declared.
3. In brief, the sequence of events leading to lodging of the instant cases and which are not in dispute is that Advertisement for the Examination was published on 24-09-2021. The Preliminary Examination consisting of Multiple Choice Questions (‘MCQ’ for short) was conducted on 30-09-2022. The petitioners participated in this examination. Immediately, after the examination, i.e. on 01.10.2022, the Respondent-Commission ca
The court upheld the authority of the examination body, emphasizing minimal judicial intervention in academic matters unless clear errors are demonstrated.
Judicial review of examination answer keys is limited; courts should not interfere unless errors are clear and demonstrable.
Point of Law : Law that compassion sympathy or claim on basis of assessment cannot be permitted as entire examination process is derailed because some candidates are disappointed or dissatisfied or p....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.