The Court should exercise its discretion judiciously while considering the grant of provisional admission to candidates challenging the fairness of an entrance test, and should not grant such admission to candidates who have not demonstrated a strong prima facie case of success or where there is no ambiguity, defect, or error in the objective type questions or key answers.

P. D Desai, C.J. (C.A.V.): In this group of eighteen appeals, which arise out of writ petitions filed on the Appellate Side by candidates seeking admission to The Post Graduate Medical Course in various Disciplines, the interim order under challenge at the instance of the appellants (University of Calcutta and Secretary of Faculty Council for Post Graduate Studies in Medicine) directs that provisional admission be granted to the concerned respondents (writ petitioners) "without prejudice and subject to the final result of the writ petitions and subject further to their compliance of other formalities in accordance with law. A simultaneous direction has been issued to the Medical Council of India to grant the necessary permission in that regard.

2. Since common questions of law and fact arise in these appeals and they are directed against a common order, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The introduction facts are that the University of Calcutta, hereinafter called "the University", awards Pmt Graduate Medical Degree or Diploma, as the case may be, to those students who successfully complete the respective course in the concerned Discipline. The number of seats in each Degree and Diploma Course is fixed as per the norms laid down by the Medical Council of India. The competing candidates for admission to these various courses being far in excess of the number of available seats, admission is granted in order of merit adjudged on the basis of the multiple choice objective type test, hereinafter called "the test", which is a recognised mode of assessment of merits.

4. So far as the cases in hand are concerned, the test was held by the University College of Medicine in October 1989 for the purpose of giving admission in different Post Graduate Medical Courses for the academic sessions 1989-91. The question paper for each test was prepared by a teacher/expert in the respective Discipline drawn from outside the State. 95 marks in the aggregate were earmarked for the test in which 95 objective type or questions, each carrying one mark, were set for each paper and they had to be answered in 75 minutes' time. Against each question multiple answers were indicated in the question paper, but one only out of those answers selected by the teacher/expert who drew the paper was to be considered as correct. Such answer is hereinafter called "the key answer". If a candidate answered the questions as per the key answers 'he was given one mark for each question. For each incorrect answer, however, a deduction of 1/2 mark by way of negative marking was made. The aggregate marks obtained by each candidate were ascertained with the aid of a computer in which the key answer to each question was fed, A merit list was thereafter prepared and published on November 8, 1989. Admission in each course was given against the available seats in order of merit as per the said list. The mark secured by the candidate, who obtained admission against the last available seat in a discipline, were treated as "the qualifying marks" for such Discipline. None having less than the qualifying marks got admission, even if the percentage of marks secured by him at the fest was otherwise high, In case of two or more candidates obtaining equal qualifying marks, the formula for resolving the tie as per the relevant rule was that the one out of them who passed the M.B.B.S. examination at the first attempt would get priority and, in case anyone or more of such candidates passed the M.B.B.S.

examination at first attempt,' the higher marks obtained in the concerned subject in the M.B.B.S. examination were treated as the determining factor.

5. It is not uncommon to find in some tests or examinations and more particularly in a test of this nature that the difference between the qualifying marks and the marks obtained by the candidate next in order of merit, who fails to get admission, is very often minimal and may sometimes be eve