Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
VIKAS MAHAJAN
Nishu Maurya – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's grievances and examination interruptions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. petitioner's claims regarding disruptions and examination handling. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. respondents' defense and claims of petitioner's late arrival. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. rebuttals to respondent's claims and petitioner's presence. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. court's assessment of time loss and impact. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. nta's duty and fair action obligations. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 7. court’s analysis of prior cases and obligations to act justly. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 8. decision on awarding grace marks and implications. (Para 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 9. final disposal of the petition. (Para 46) |
JUDGMENT :
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J.
1. The grievance articulated in the present petition is that the petitioner was subjected to repeated interruptions and harassment mid-examination for re-verification of her identity credentials with respect to her Aadhaar, thereby leading to loss of crucial exam time while she was taking her National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (Undergraduate) – 2025 Examination [NEET (UG) 2025]. The said exam was conducted by resp
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.
The court reaffirmed that candidates must be granted uninterrupted exam conditions, and compensatory marks should be awarded when interruptions occur due to administrative actions.
Legal principles around the application of normalization formulas for compensatory marking in examinations must consider distinct procedural contexts.
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.
Minor technical irregularities in recruitment exams, promptly rectified without systemic fraud or inability to segregate tainted/untainted candidates, do not vitiate entire selection process.
(1) Cancellation of an examination, either for the purposes of gaining admission into professional and other courses or for the purpose of recruitment to a government post, is justified only in cases....
Examination need not be canceled as a whole.Merit list to be revised based on revision of marks obtained determined in accordance with normalisation formula.First round of conselling would continue a....
The examination authority is not liable for minor grievances raised by a negligible number of candidates, especially in force majeure situations, as these do not impact the overall integrity of a nat....
The evaluation undertaken by the examining bodies should not be viewed with suspicion unless it is prima facie established that it was not fair or transparent.
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
