Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
INDERJEET SINGH, MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Savina Kumari, W/o. Sunil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education, Department Of Education – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
Order :
Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the issue involved in this appeal has already been considered and decided by this Court in the matter of Sanjay Kumar Bhakar Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.636/2024 along with other connected matters) decided on 17.03.2025, wherein the following order was passed:-
“1. In the present batch of appeals since common questions are involved, hence with consent of the parties, the appeals have been heard together and are being decided by the present common order.
2. These appeals have been filed by the appellants challenging the judgment dated 25.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4777/2021 (Surjan Dhawan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. along with other connected matters) whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions.
3. Being aggrieved by the order dated 25.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellants have filed these appeals.
4. The learned Single Judge while decidi
Judicial review in recruitment matters is limited; courts should not interfere with expert committee decisions unless clear errors are demonstrated.
Judicial review of examination answer keys is limited; courts should not interfere unless errors are clear and demonstrable.
Point of Law : Practice of calling for answer scripts/answer sheets and thereafter to order re-evaluation and that too in absence of any specific provision in relevant rules for re-evaluation and tha....
Judicial review in matters of academic evaluation is limited, and courts should defer to expert opinions unless there are specific provisions allowing for re-evaluation.
Judicial review of answer keys is limited; courts should not substitute their judgment for that of experts unless errors are clearly demonstrable.
Courts should be slow in interfering with expert opinion in academic matters and assessment of questions by the courts to arrive at correct answers is not permissible.
Judicial review of examination answer keys is limited to exceptional cases where the key is demonstrably wrong, and the burden of proof lies with the candidates to show such error without inferential....
Judicial review of examination answer keys is limited; courts should not interfere unless a demonstrable error is shown, respecting the expertise of academic authorities.
Limited judicial review and reluctance to interfere with the decisions of expert bodies in matters of limited expertise, as established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court's principles
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
Listen Article