Back
MANMOHAN, SAURABH BANERJEE
Komal Dhawan – Appellant
Versus
High Court of Delhi Through Its Registrar General – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANMOHAN, J.
1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the Order dated 7th May, 2022 rejecting the representation of the petitioner dated 8th April, 2022. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the Respondent no.1 to revaluate the shorthand skill test (Paper-I) given by the petitioner as part of the Senior Personal Assistant (‘SPA’) Examination – 2021 in accordance with the rules and thereby award 4.5 marks to the petitioner and consequently appoint her as a SPA with consequential benefits.
SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in SPA Examination-2021, the petitioner was stated to have committed 18.5 mistakes in Paper-I and 21.5 mistakes in Paper-II and thus in both Paper-I and Paper-II, the petitioner had been shown to have committed mistakes more than what was permissible, i.e., 16.5. Accordingly, the petitioner was not considered for promotion to the post of SPA.
3. He further stated that the petitioner after analysing her transcripts received pursuant to an application under the RTI Act, found that the respondent no.1 had counted 4.5 mistakes of the petitioner in Paper-I in complete contravention to the releva
Courts should refrain from re-evaluating answer sheets or typewriting sheets and should presume the correctness of the criteria applied by the examining authority. The absence of any rule or procedur....
Judicial interference in examination results is limited to rare situations where a clear material error is established; courts should not reassess answers without evident justification.
Judicial review cannot extend to the re-evaluation of examination results; courts must respect the evaluators' judgments when properly conducted without clear procedural violations.
Limited scope for judicial interference in examination results and the presumption of correctness of key answers.
Judicial review allows for correction of computational errors in marking but not re-evaluation of exam criteria or assessment methodologies.
The importance of refraining from re-evaluating answer scripts and impinging on an academic evaluator's jurisdiction in the context of judicial review.
Telangana State Public Service Commission - Power of Judicial review - Scope and Interference - Scope of interference of court in evaluation of answer scripts where candidates have committed errors o....
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
