The court held that the University was entitled to prescribe regulations and rules for admission to the course and to hold an examination or tests to select candidates according to merit. The court also found that the questions set in the written test were objective type questions and that the University was entitled to ask the candidates to give the most appropriate answer, even though more than one alternative mentioned in the question might be partially correct. The court also found that the model answers prepared by the University were not incorrect and that the petitioner had not proved that there was any lack of bona fide on the part of the University in selecting these model answers.

( 1 ) THE petitioner who is a Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery, was a candidate for admission to Master of Surgery (General) Course. 1982 of the Calcutta University. But he was not successful in the written test conducted by the Council of Post-Graduate Studies in Medicine. Calcutta University. The petitioner has. inter alia, prayed for commanding the respondent to cancel all the proceedings relating to the said test held for selection of candidates for admission to the M. S. (General Surgery) of Calcutta University. 1982. to forbear from giving effect to the said test and for conducting scrutiny and review of the petitioner's answer script. The petitioner has also prayed for directing the respondents to admit him to the said Post-Graduate course after proper evaluation of his merit by granting him full marks for correctly answered questions irrespective of model answers and irrespective of the impugned results of the test.

( 2 ) WHILE issuing this Rule on 20th Dec. 1982. his Lordship the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarun Kumar Bose (as he then was), made an interim order directing the respondents 1 to 4 to admit the petitioner in the M. Section (General Surgery) Course commencing in the session 1982 until further orders of the Court. The learned Judge made it clear that the said admission would be strictly on an ad hoc basis and subject to further orders. On the application for interim orders, the University of Calcutta had subsequently made an application for vacating the said interim orders but the said prayer was not granted and this Rule was directed to be expeditiously heard.

( 3 ) THE Secretary of the Institute of Post-Graduate Medical Education and Research and the Secretary of the Council of the Post-Graduate Studies in Medicine, Calcuta Univerisity had published a notice containing general information for admission to M. D. . M. Section and several Diploma Courses of the University of Calcutta for the session of 1982. Twenty-five seats in-eluding five reserved for the West Bengal Medical Service were available for said M. S. (General Surgery) Course. Candidates were to be selected in order of merit determined on the basis of marks secured in the written test examination (total 75 ). past career ftotal 20) and a weightage (5 marks) where applicable. According to the General Information, in the written test examination 75 objective type of questions, each bearing one mark were to be answered in one hour's time, provided, that, for each incorrect answer 1/2 mark in the shape of negative marking was to be deducted. The minimum qualifying mark for admission to the said course was fixed at 25 marks out of 75.

( 4 ) THE written test was held on 26th June. 1982 and the question papers given to the examinees including the petitioner, among others, contained the following instructions:-- (a) Choose only one most appropriate answer against each question and put that particular answer no. only in the box provided against the respective question. No. in the answer script. (b) More than one answer if recorded against any question will be treated as wrong answer. (c) For each wrong answer 1/2 mark would be deducted and for each correct answer one mark will be awarded. It appears that the University of Calcutta had caused to be prepared model of 'one most appropriate answer' in respect of each question set in the said test and the answers submitted by the examinees including the petitioner were evaluated with the help of computer. The petitioner's name was not included in the list of candidates provisionally selected for admission to M. Section (General Surgery)' Course. 1982.

( 5 ) ACCORDING to the respondents, out of 75 questions, the petitioner had given 39 correct answers. 33 incorrect answers and he had also left three questions unanswered by not attempting two questions and by giving a note of interrogation against one question. According to the calculation of marks made by the respondents, the petitioner