Judicial review in academic evaluations is restricted; courts should not interfere unless there is clear illegality or arbitrariness in expert decisions.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

1. Through the present Writ Petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners assail the correctness of the Order dated 30.05.2025 passed the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'], in O.A. Nos.1102/2025, 1750/2025, 1405/2025, 1408/2025 and 1814/2025, as well as the Orders dated 17.07.2025 and 11.08.2025 passed by the Tribunal in O.A. Nos.1606/2025 and 1943/2025, respectively [hereinafter collectively referred to as 'Impugned Orders'].

2. By way of the Impugned Orders, the Tribunal dismissed the Original Applications (OAs) challenging the final results and answer keys of the Combined Graduate Level Examination (CGLE), 2024 conducted by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC), holding that the alleged infirmities in the evaluation of the Tier-II examination, relating to grant of “bonus marks” for 22 questions and alteration of answers in the Final Answer Key released after declaration of results, stemmed from a conscious decision of the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) committee of the SSC and therefore, did not warrant judicial re-evaluation.

3. With the consent of learned counsel representing the parties, the present Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

FACTUAL MATRIX

4. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed.

5. The SSC issued the notification for the CGLE, 2024 on 24.06.2024 for filling approximately 17,727 vacancies. Paragraph 13 of the said advertisement delineates the examination scheme, comprising two stages, Tier-I and Tier-II. It also incorporates a provision for normalization of marks through a specific formula, as detailed in the notice dated 07.02.2019.

6. The Tier-I Computer-Based Examination was conducted in September 2024, and the results thereof were declared on 05.12.2024. The Tier-II Examination, comprising Paper-I (Session-I with three sections and Session-II) and Paper-II, was conducted on 18.01.2025 and 20.01.2025. It is stated that one component thereof, namely the Data Entry Speed Test Module (Session-II), could not be conducted as scheduled due to a technical glitch and was subsequently held on 31.01.2025.

7. On 21.01.2025, the SSC published the tentative Answer Key for Paper-I of the Tier-II Examination, pursuant whereto representations were invited and submitted by candidates in respect of the disputed issues/answers.

8. The SSC declared the final result and published the list of candidates shortlisted for posts other than Junior Statistical Officer/Statistical Investigator on 12.03.2025. Thereafter, on 18.03.2025, after obtaining post preferences and declaring the final result, the SSC released the Final Answer Key as well as the final scores of candidates in the Tier-II Examination.

9. It is further recorded in the pleadings that, under the Revised/Final Answer Key, nine (09) questions from the examination conducted on 18.01.2025 and ten (10) questions from the examination conducted on 20.01.2025 were declared invalid. Attention was also drawn to a tabulated list of twenty-two (22) questions in respect of which grace marks were awarded uniformly to all candidates, including those who had not attempted the questions or had furnished incorrect answers to the disputed questions.

10. Aggrieved thereby, the candidates instituted the aforementioned OAs before the Tribunal, which came to be dismissed on, inter alia,