IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
Ms. Aishani Ojha – Appellant
Versus
National Testing Agency & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 11927 of 2022 & CM APPLs. 35617 of 2022 & 35618 of 2022
Decided on : 26-08-2022
JEE (Main) - Examination Irregularities - JEE (Main) Examination, 2022 - Section 2(1) of JEE Act - Section 3(2) of JEE Act
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner challenges the correctness of the final score-card issued by NTA for JEE (Main) Examination, 2022 due to technical glitches resulting in non-recording of her responses to several questions in session 2. She seeks direction to re-attempt session 2 and appear in JEE (Advanced).
Finding of the Court:
The Court found discrepancies between the response sheet and audit log of the Petitioner, but after examination and technical expert's explanation, concluded that there was no technical error in the system resulting in the low score. The petition was dismissed.
Issues: Validity of the final score-card, technical glitches in recording responses, eligibility for JEE (Advanced)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court examined the discrepancies and technical explanations to determine the validity of the Petitioner's claims regarding technical glitches and found no merit in the petition.
Final Decision: The petition is dismissed along with pending application(s).
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
1. Petitioner who secured 75.7614055 in session 1 and 8.3123556 in session 2 of JEE (Main) Examination, 2022 [hereinafter, “JEE (Main)”] and is ineligible to appear for the JEE (Advanced) Examination, 2022 [hereinafter, “JEE (Advanced)], challenges the correctness of the final score-card issued by Respondent No. 1 – National testing Agency [“NTA”] on the ground of technical glitches resulting in non-recording of her responses to several questions in session 2 of the said examination. She prays for a direction to allow her to re-attempt session 2, and appear in JEE (Advanced).
2. Briefly stated, Petitioner’s case is that she had attempted a total of 75 questions in session 2 of JEE (Main). However, to her utter dismay, when the NTA declared the provisional answer key and candidates’ response sheets on 03rd August, 2022, only 3 questions were shown as attempted in her response sheet. Upon discovering such error, Petitioner raised her grievance before the NTA via several e-mail communications and even personally submitted a copy of her application to obtain her audit log, but to no avail. As there is no mechanism for re-evaluation/re-checking of results, Petitioner is constrained to approach this Court.
3. Mr. Deepak Jain, counsel for Petitioner, alleges anomalies, technical glitches, system malfunctions and other abundant errors in the conduct of JEE (Main) resulting in grave prejudice to Petitioner, who has been unfairly shown to have attained such a low percentile, despite her bright academic record.
4. After hearing the preliminary submissions advanced by Mr. Jain, the Court on 17th August, 2022, while issuing notice, directed the NTA to file the audit log and response sheet of Petitioner for examination. Consequent thereto, NTA produced the record/ documents, which were thoroughly examined by Petitioner and her counsel. Mr. Jain apprised the Court of various discrepancies between the response sheet and audit log of Petitioner (as produced by the NTA). Further, he submitted that as per general instructions for conduct of JEE (Main) entailed in the information bulletin, the examination was scheduled for 180 minutes [i.e., from 15:00 PM to 18:00 PM] and a clock is set by the server which automatically logs out the candidate after the expiry of the allotted time. The candidate’s submitted answers are recorded by the end of the said time. In that light, he pointed out that about 42 responses of Petitioner were randomly cleared in last 13 minutes of the examination; 12 of which were cleared at 18:01:44:560 PM, which is impossible, considering the automatic submission of the paper.
5. On the other hand, NTA controverted the allegations of technical glitches. Counsel for NTA, placing reliance upon the audit log, emphasised that Petitioner cleared the responses entered by her, and thus, the same were not evaluated and the percentile for session 2, as mentioned in the score-card of Petitioner, is correct. As regards the issue of substantial number of clearances, he argues that no reason can be conclusively attributed thereto as giving a particular response to a question is the prerogative of the candidate. Perhaps on account of the policy of negative marking for incorrect responses, she decided to clear the responses. It is generally a practice amongst candidates to not attempt the questions they are unsure of, in order to avoid negative marking.
6. Although Petitioner has not secured the cut-off percentile in either of the sessions, yet, having regard to the discrepancies highlighted by Mr. Jain, on 22nd August, 2022, the Court passed interim directions to Respondents to register and process Petitioner’s application for JEE (Advanced). Now, since the relevant record has been produced, the Court has finally heard the matter and given anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by the counsel, and perus
The Court's decision was based on the examination of electronic records and technical explanations, emphasizing the importance of maintaining accurate electronic records in standardized examinations.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of digital evidence and the burden of proof in establishing the authenticity of documents in legal proceedings.
Disputed questions of fact and elaborate evidence required for adjudication under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Candidates cannot challenge recruitment processes post-results without demonstrating legal injury or material error affecting their outcomes.
Fairness in examination protocols mandates that interruptions affecting a candidate's performance must be addressed through compensatory measures such as grace marks or re-examinations.
Policy decisions regarding exam eligibility cannot be arbitrarily altered and must adhere to established criteria, even in unprecedented circumstances like a pandemic.
Candidates must report grievances during exams; failure to do so may bar post-exam relief, establishing that immediate protests are necessary for claims of technical errors.
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.