The benefit of doubt in matters related to the correctness of answer keys in competitive examinations should be resolved in favor of the examination authority, and the key answers should be presumed correct unless proven otherwise by clear demonstration.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.30838 of 2019 dated 10.12.2019.)

Mohammed Shaffiq, J.

1. The short question that arises for consideration in this writ appeal relates to the scope of interference of the writ Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the report of an Expert Committee/ Body in relation to question/ answer keys in a Competitive Examination.

2. Brief facts:

2.1. The Teachers Recruitment Board / 3rd Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the "Appellant Board") issued a Notification/Advertisement No.03/2017 on 09.05.2017 for filling up vacancies for the year 2016 – 2017 through direct recruitment to the post of Post Graduate Assistants /Physical Education Directors Grade-I in School Education and other Departments including 387 posts of P.G. Assistant (Physics).

2.2. The Respondent herein belongs to Most Backward Community (MBC), holding a Post Graduation Degree (M.Sc., in Physics and B.Ed.,) and applied for the above post of P.G.Assistant (Physics). The Respondent appeared for the Written Examination conducted by the Appellant Board on 02.07.2017.

2.3. The Appellant Board published a tentative answer key on 19.07.2017 leaving it open to the candidates to submit their objections, if any, in relation to tentative answer key with relevant material/ authority on or before 23.07.2017.

2.4. The Respondent submitted his objection to the tentative answer key published in relation to Question Nos.27 and 82 in "C series" question booklet for Physics subject, claiming/ stating that the answers to the aforesaid questions were wrong as per the approved textbooks.

2.5. On consideration of the objections received from various stakeholders, the answer keys were finalised by the Expert Committee and the final answer key was published on the Official Website of the Appellant Board on 11.08.2017. Importantly, there was no change in answers for Question Nos.27 and 82.

2.6. As per the above-published result, the Respondent secured 76 marks in the written examination. The cut-off mark for selection to the post of PG Assistant (Physics) in MBC Category was fixed at 78.

3. Aggrieved, the Respondent approached this Court by way of writ petition in W.P. No.22951 of 2017 with a prayer to direct the Appellants to award two marks for the Respondent for Question Nos.27 and 82 in “C” Series Question Paper and allow the Respondent to participate in Certificate Verification with regard to the appointment to the post of P.G.Assistant (Physics).

4.1. It is stated that pursuant to filing of the above writ petition, the Appellant Board appointed an Expert Committee consisting of four members, for considering all the issues raised with regard to answer keys including the objections raised by the Respondent herein.

4.2. It was submitted in the above writ petition by the learned counsel for the Respondent herein that even after the Expert Committee Report, the discrepancies pointed out were not sorted out. After recording the above submission, this Court directed that the examination papers of the writ petitioner can be rechecked by the competent authorities to find out discrepancy, if any, and to rectify the same.

5.1. Pursuant to the above order of this Court, the impugned order dated 10.12.2019 was passed, wherein after recording the directions of this Court in W.P.No.22951 of 2017 dated 10.09.2018, it was stated that the Board had called the subject experts to examine the disputed questions raised by the writ petitioner in Physics subject and to give their report. The Committtee comprised of two faculty members.

5.2. The Respondent''s claim was rejected by the Expert Committee and it was stated that there is no change in the final answer key thereby the request/ representation of the Respondent to award marks