Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
VIBHU BAKHRU, AMIT MAHAJAN
Vivek Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Registrar General, Delhi High Court – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to evaluation based on answer key. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. claims of erroneous evaluation and requested reassessment. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. scope of judicial review on evaluation tests. (Para 12) |
| 4. judicial review limited to demonstrably incorrect evaluations. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 24) |
| 5. limitations of objecting past the evaluation stage. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. final determination on challenge to specific questions. (Para 25 , 56 , 70) |
| 7. court's dismissal of petitions. (Para 75) |
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. The petitioners have filed the present petitions impugning the final answer keys of the Delhi Judicial Service Preliminary Examination, which was declared after considering the objections raised by various candidates. According to the petitioners, answers to certain questions are not the appropriate answers and therefore, evaluation of the answer sheets is flawed.
2. The petitioners have been unsuccessful in being short-listed to appear for the Delhi Judicial Service Mains Examination as the marks secured by them in the preliminary examination fall short of the specified threshold. The petitioners state that if they are award
Judicial review of examination results is permissible only when demonstrable errors are shown in the evaluation process; not on mere disagreement with answer keys.
The scope of judicial review in challenging examination answer keys and the need for demonstrable error beyond any vestige of doubt to interfere with the examining body's decisions.
The court ruled that accepting two correct answers in an examination undermines evaluation standards, which require clarity and a singular correct response per question.
Judicial review of examination answer keys is permitted only when keys are demonstrably unconstitutional, ensuring fair promotion processes for candidates.
Judicial review of answer keys in public examinations is limited; courts should defer to expert opinions unless errors are demonstrably clear.
Judicial review of examination answer keys is limited; courts should not interfere unless errors are clear and demonstrable.
Judicial review of answer keys is limited; courts should not substitute their judgment for that of experts unless errors are clearly demonstrable.
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
