Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 15671
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
R.Suresh Kumar, C.Saravanan, JJ
C.THIRUNAVUKKARASU – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
W.A.No.3486 of 2024
Mrs.Kavitha Nithyanandan, Mr.U.M.Ravichandran, Mr.R.Neelakandan, Mr.K.Sathish Kumar
Judicial review in academic matters is limited; courts must defer to expert opinions unless key answers are manifestly erroneous.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ Petition for additional marks in competitive examination - The appellant sought to declare eligibility for appointment as Graduate Teacher based on additional marks for specific questions - The Writ Court dismissed the petition, stating that claims would alter the selection list and prejudice selected candidates - The court emphasized the finality of expert opinions in academic matters and the need for candidates to raise objections during the recruitment process - The appellant's claims for additional marks were not substantiated as the expert committee had already validated the key answers. (Paras 3, 20, 26)
(B) Judicial Review - The court reiterated that it cannot interfere with expert opinions unless key answers are manifestly erroneous - The court must exercise restraint in academic matters and cannot substitute its judgment for that of experts. (Paras 14, 18)
Facts of the case:
The appellant contested the Writ Court's dismissal of her petition for additional marks in a competitive examination, arguing that the answers to specific questions were incorrect. The court found that the expert committee had already validated the answers and that the appellant did not raise objections in a timely manner.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the expert committee's decisions and emphasized the importance of candidates raising objections during the recruitment process.
Issues: The main issues included whether the appellant was entitled to additional marks and the validity of the expert committee's decisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the expert committee's opinion is final and cannot be challenged unless the key answers are patently wrong. The court also highlighted the importance of candidates being proactive in raising objections.
Result: Writ Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.SARAVANAN, J.
This Intra-Court Appeal is directed against the Order dated 29.07.2024 passed by a Writ Court in W.P.No.20622 of 2024, dismssing the Writ Petition filed by the appellant herein.
2. The above Writ Petition was filed by the appellant herein for the following relief:-
“Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Declaration, to declare that the petitioner is eligible for additional marks in the competitive examination held by the third respondent on 04.02.2024 and consequently eligible to be appointed as Graduate Teacher – History pursuant to the recruitment notification No.3/2023 dated 25.10.2023 and addendum notifications No.03A/2023 dated 15.11.2023 and No.03B/2023 dated 17.05.2024.”
3. Operative portion of the Order dated 29.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.20622 of 2014 reads as under:-
“3. The issues raised by the petitioner in this writ petition have already been dealt with by this Court in WP.No.15785 of 2024, etc., batch dated 01.07.2024 and the relevant portion of the order is extracted hereunder:-
16. That apart, now the entire certificate verification has been completed and the Board is about to publish the selection list. At this juncture, if the claims of the petitioners are accepted, it will lead to alteration of selection list, thereby selected candidates will be prejudiced. As stated supra, if there is discrepancy in framing the questions, answers and awarding marks, it will be for all the candidates and not for the petitioners only.
17. This Court after hearing the petitioners, by an order dated 24.06.2024, directed the respondents to answer the following queries:-
“(i) The procedure contemplated by the agency while initially framing the questions, arriving at the key answers, while considering the objections and arriving at the final answers;
(ii) In respect of the questions which are given as star and marks are given, whether all the questions have been printer mistake and if so, whether any expert was involved in verifying the draft of the question paper?
(iii) The Court will only then consider the larger question that how much percentage of mistakes can be there in a given exam and if the mistakes are beyond a particular level, whether it would amount to very results being fortunates are not?
(iv) If so at what percentage, the mistakes can be permitted to be corrected?”
18. Insofar as the first query raised by this Court, the Board answered that all the question papers are set up at the Board-s office by the experts as per the syllabus allotted to them. After correction by the experts, it was sent to the printer. After completion of examination, tentative key answers were published by the Board as provided by the experts. In the online objection tracker portal, the candidates can raise their objections with standard materials to substantiate their difference in answers. The objections and the materials are placed before the experts and the final key answer, as provided by the experts, was published by the Board.
19. Insofar as the second query is concerned, spelling error in Tamil/English happened due to the setter's style of writing. Therefore, it can be taken as printing error. Further in order to maintain confidentiality of the question paper, no experts were involved for verifying the draft question paper. Insofar as the third query is concerned, there are no negative marks in the examination conducted by the Board. So, if there is any error in the question paper/ambiguous answers, final key answers were released based on the report of the subject experts. Whenever error occurs in questions/ambiguous answers, the particular questions are treated as star marked question and were awarded marks to all the candidates, who have attended the examination, invariably. Insofar as the fourth query is concerned, there is no negative marks are awarded for the wrong answers as such percentage of mistake not a par.
20. The above
