Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Mini Pushkarna, J.
Vedanshi Pathak Through Guardian Piyush Kumar Pathak – Appellant
Versus
National Testing Agency & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 11925 of 2022
Decided On : 22-02-2023
JEE Advanced Examination - Petitioner's denial to register due to duplication in candidate names - JEE (Main) 2022, JEE (Main) 2023 - [JEE (Main) 2022, JEE (Main) 2023] - The court recognized the flaw in the compilation of the list of eligible candidates and directed investigation to avoid such errors in the future. The respondent undertook measures to prevent duplication in candidate names for JEE (Main) 2023, including scrutinizing applications and seeking clarification from candidates with apparent duplication. Public notices were issued to inform candidates of the consequences of multiple applications. The court disposed of the petition, noting the respondent's steps to prevent duplication in candidate names.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought directions to allow her to register for the JEE Advanced Examination, claiming denial due to duplication in candidate names. The court had previously dismissed the petitioner's prayer for interim relief. The Division Bench also refused to grant any interim relief to the petitioner. The JEE Advanced 2022 Examination had already been conducted, and the academic session for selected students was over.
Finding of the Court:
The court recognized the flaw in the compilation of the list of eligible candidates and directed investigation to avoid such errors in the future. The respondent undertook measures to prevent duplication in candidate names for JEE (Main) 2023, including scrutinizing applications and seeking clarification from candidates with apparent duplication. Public notices were issued to inform candidates of the consequences of multiple applications. The court disposed of the petition, noting the respondent's steps to prevent duplication in candidate names.
Issues: Denial of petitioner's opportunity to register for JEE Advanced Examination due to duplication in candidate names, refusal of interim relief by the court, and the completion of the academic session for selected students.
Ratio Decidendi: The court recognized the flaw in the compilation of the list of eligible candidates and directed investigation to avoid such errors in the future. The respondent undertook measures to prevent duplication in candidate names for JEE (Main) 2023, including scrutinizing applications and seeking clarification from candidates with apparent duplication. Public notices were issued to inform candidates of the consequences of multiple applications.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the petition, noting the respondent's steps to prevent duplication in candidate names.
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/ Hybrid Hearing]
Mini Pushkarna, J. (Oral)
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking directions against the respondents to provide her an opportunity to appear in the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) Advanced Examination, that was scheduled to be held on 28.08.2022.
2. It is averred in the present petition that the petitioner has been wrongly denied the opportunity to register and appear in the JEE Advanced 2022, mainly because of the fact that there was duplication in the names of the candidates shortlisted by the respondent No. 1.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that she appeared in the JEE mains examination and scored 88.2866394 percentile against the cut of percentile of 88.4121383 to register for JEE Advanced Examination. The petitioner missed the cut off percentile by only 0.126 percentile due to duplicity of Common Rank List (CRL).
4. When the present matter was listed for hearing on 26.08.2022, this Court by its detailed judgment had dismissed the prayer of the petitioner for interim relief, wherein she had prayed for direction to the respondents to allow her to register and appear in the JEE Advanced 2022, which was going to be held on 28.08.2022.
5. Against the aforesaid judgment dated 26.08.2022, the petitioner herein had filed an appeal, being L.P.A. No. 496/2022. The said appeal was dismissed by order dated 27.08.2022 by the Division Bench, wherein the Division Bench also refused to grant any interim relief to the petitioner.
6. In view of the aforesaid, the first two prayers of the petitioner regarding direction to the respondents to revise cut off percentile of JEE (Mains), 2022 to appear in JEE Advanced 2022 by removing duplicate CRL for a single candidate and for allowing the petitioner to register and appear for JEE Advanced 2022, has become infructuous. The said JEE Advanced 2022 Examination has already been conducted and the Academic Session in question for the students who were selected in JEE Advanced 2022, is also over.
7. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner pressed the third relief as sought in the present writ petition for direction to respondent No. 1 i.e. the National Testing Agency (NTA) to produce the Complete CRL of all shortlisted candidates along with details of number of duplicate candidates having registered with different application IDs.
8. This Court notes that the Division Bench of this Court, while disposing LPA No. 496/2022 preferred by the petitioner herein, in its order dated 27.08.2022 recognised the fact that the petitioner herein had pointed out an important flaw in the manner in which the list of eligible candidates had been compiled. The Court took note of the fact that names of certain candidates appeared twice in the shortlist as a result of the manner in which those candidates would have filled up their application forms. Thus, the Division Bench had directed that the matter be fully investigated and all measures be taken to ensure that such errors are avoided in future.
9. Pursuant to the aforesaid directions issued by the Division Bench, the respondent No. 1-NTA carried out an extensive exercise at its end and filed a short affidavit dated 08.02.2023 pursuant thereto. The said affidavit dated 08.02.2023, as filed on behalf of NTA reads as follows:
"4. That the Petitioner, in the Rejoinder Affidavit, had reiterated the submissions made in the Writ Petition, which had already been duly addressed and replied to vide Affidavits dated 22.08.2022 and 25.08.2022 filed by the NTA. In addition, the Petitioner alleged that NTA had furnished incorrect details and submissions on its Affidavit.
5. That the contents of Para 9 of Affidavit of NTA dated 25.08.2022, whereby, it has been submitted that only 10 candidates were common in both the sessions of JEE (Main) 2022 with different Application Numbers, is the reproduction of the Letter sent by NIC dated 25.08.2022. Therefore, the averments ma
The court emphasized the importance of preventing duplication in candidate names for competitive examinations and recognized the need for thorough investigation and measures to avoid such errors in t....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of digital evidence and the burden of proof in establishing the authenticity of documents in legal proceedings.
Policy decisions regarding exam eligibility cannot be arbitrarily altered and must adhere to established criteria, even in unprecedented circumstances like a pandemic.
The legal principle established is that the failure to comply with the prescribed procedures for category selection and the absence of demonstrated bona fides can lead to the denial of requests for c....
Petitioner's right to alter his application category after failing to adhere to established procedures was denied, emphasizing strict adherence to process in examination applications.
Disputed questions of fact and elaborate evidence required for adjudication under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Limited interference with policy decisions and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on examinations.
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
