Back
A. Y. KOGJE, SAMIR J. DAVE
PARTH MANISHKUMAR PATEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.Y. KOGJE, J.
1. This appeal under the Letters Patent is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 16.06.2023 in Special Civil Application No. 7813 of 2023.
2. The issue at the root is the claim of the appellants for additional marks for the answers given by them to two particular questions in the preliminary objective test conducted as a part of recruitment to the post of Assistant Forest Officers by the State through the GPSC. According to the appellants, the key answers to the two particular questions where wrong whereas the answers given by the appellants were right and therefore the appellants were entitle 2 to additional marks.
3. By an order dated 20.06.2023, in an interim application with the present appeal, the appellants were permitted to appear in the main examination which was scheduled the very next day that is on 21.06.2023. Accordingly, all the appellants had appeared in the main examination however pending the appeal their results were not declared along with the results of the main examination.
3.1 Another interim application was filed by the appellants seeking interim direction to declare the results of all the appellants. This prayer so that in case t
Timely objections to answer keys in recruitment exams are crucial, and expert opinions hold significant weight in determining the correctness of answers.
Point of Law : Law that compassion sympathy or claim on basis of assessment cannot be permitted as entire examination process is derailed because some candidates are disappointed or dissatisfied or p....
The court upheld the refusal of interim relief for candidates who missed the application deadline, emphasizing adherence to recruitment policies and the necessity of establishing a prima facie case.
Point of law: Courts should be very slow in interfering with expert opinion in academic matters. In any event, assessment of the questions by the courts itself to arrive at correct answers is not per....
The court mandated grace marks for incorrect answer keys, emphasizing the priority of accurate assessment in recruitment processes.
The court established that an expert committee's evaluation of answer keys in recruitment processes is presumptively correct, allowing judicial restraint unless glaring errors are evident.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to interfere in examination matters, the requirement for clear and unambiguous questions, and the need for rare and exception....
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
