Back
SACHIN SINGH RAJPUT
Vinod Kumar Bhaskar, S/o. Shri Hemlal – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, General Administration Department – Respondent
ORDER :
Sachin Singh Rajput, J.
As the issue sought to be addressed by this Court looks similar in character, all these Writ Petitions are being disposed of by a common order.
2. The facts necessary for disposal of these writ petitions, in brevity, having been gleaned from WPS 2167/2024 being atop, run thus :
(ii) The petitioners appeared in the Preliminary Examination held on 11.02.2024 in two sessions (10 AM to 12 noon & 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM), in accordance with the CGPSC Procedure Rules, 2014 as well as the State Services Examination Rules. The question paper in the first session was of General Studies and that in the second session was of the Aptitude Test. Both these question papers are in four sets i.e. Set-A, Set-B, Set-C & Set-D.
(iii) After preliminary examination being over, on 16.02.2024 model answer was published by the CGPSC and objections from the examinees, if any, were invited.
3. Since meat of the matter is the correctness or otherswise of the answers to the disputed questions, cas
The court upheld the authority of the examination body, emphasizing minimal judicial intervention in academic matters unless clear errors are demonstrated.
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....
Judicial review of examination answer keys is limited; courts should not interfere unless errors are clear and demonstrable.
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.
The onus is on the candidate to not only demonstrate that the key answer is incorrect but also that it is a glaring mistake which is totally apparent and no inferential process or reasoning is requir....
The Court cannot interfere with expert opinion unless key answers are patently wrong, and there is no provision 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
