Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(RAJ) 3067
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
ARUN BHANSALI
SHUBHAM VYAS – Appellant
Versus
RAJASTHAN SUBORDINATE AND MINISTERIAL SERVICE SELECTION BOARD – Respondent
CW/8034/2022
The scope of judicial review against expert's opinion in matters of education and other technical fields is extremely limited.
Headnote:
[KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, Laxman Singh Bhati and Shubham Vyas, challenged the final answer key and marks awarded in the recruitment examination for the post of Motor Vehicle Sub Inspector held by the Rajasthan Subordinate & Ministerial Service Selection Board. The petitioners questioned the validity of the final answer key in relation to specific questions.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioners failed to demonstrate that the final answer key was incorrect or that there were glaring mistakes. The court further held that the Expert Committee had followed an elaborate process to consider objections raised by the candidates and that the court could not sit as an appellate authority over the wisdom and expertise of the experts.
Issues: 1. Whether the final answer key and marks awarded in the recruitment examination were valid.2. Whether the Expert Committee had erred in its conclusions regarding the disputed questions.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The scope of judicial review against expert's opinion is extremely limited.2. The courts should be reluctant to entertain pleas challenging the correctness of key answers unless there are clear cut, black and white, open and shut choices of the decision of the expert body being palpably wrong.3. The burden is on the candidates to demonstrate that the final answer key is incorrect and that there are glaring mistakes.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6061/2022
Laxman Singh Bhati S/o Sh. Shiv Singh Bhati, Aged About 33
Years, R/o 292, Thakur Ji Ka Mandir Kshetra, Village And Post
Gaju, Tehsil Mundwa, District Nagar, Rajasthan (341024).
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
Rajathan Subordinate And Ministerial Service Selection
Board, Through Secretary, Having Its Office At State
Institute Of Agriculture Management Premises, Tonk Rd,
Shreeji Nagar, Prithviraj Colony, Durgapura, Jaipur,
Rajasthan 302018.
2.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary,
Rajasthan Transport Department, Having Its Office At
Parivahan Bhawan, Sahkar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan
302005.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8034/2022
Shubham Vyas S/o Shri Satyadev Vyas, Aged About 29 Years, R/
o C-146, Azad Nagar, Near Pani Ki Tanki, Bhilwara, Rajasthan
(311001).
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministerial Service Selection
Board, Through Having Its Office At State Institute Of
Agriculture Management Premises, Tonk Rd, Shreeji
Nagar, Prithviraj Colony, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan
302016.
2.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary,
Rajasthan Transport Department, Having Its Office At
Parivahan Bhawan, Sahkar Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan
302005.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Pradeep Singh Khichi.
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Sudhir Tak, AAG.
Mr. Sarans Vij.
Mr. Rajesh Punia.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
03/01/2023
These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners
aggrieved against the final answer key and the marks awarded
(2 of 11)
pursuant to the recruitment on the post of Motor Vehicle Sub
Inspector held by Rajasthan Subordinate & Ministerial Service
Selection Board (‘the Board’) in terms of advertisement dated
24.11.2021.
It is, inter alia, indicated in the writ petitions that pursuant
to the advertisement, the petitioners applied and were subjected
to written examination, wherein, three papers (i) General
Knowledge & Everyday Science – 100 marks, (ii) Language (Hindi
& English) – 100 marks and (iii) Automobile & Mechanical
Engineering – 200 marks were held.
After publishing the model answer key, objections were
invited, to which, the petitioners objected. Whereafter, the final
answer key have been published by the respondent-Board and
marks awarded.
Feeling aggrieved, the present writ petitions have been filed.
While, petitioner – Laxman Singh Bhati has questioned the
validity of final answer key in relation to questions No. 70, 60, 63,
123 and 136, petitioner – Shubham Vyas has questioned the
validity of final answer key in relation to questions No. 2, 26, 25,
87, 90 and 123.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, with reference to the
material produced in the writ petitions, made submissions that the
conclusion arrived at by the respondents while issuing the final
answer key qua the questions under challenge, are incorrect
and/or requires modification and a consequential effect need to be
given to the marks awarded to the petitioners.
Reply to the writ petitions have been filed by the respondent-
Board, inter alia, observing that several objections in relation to
(3 of 11)
large number of questions were received and the same have been
thoroughly examined by the Experts, who have arrived at a
particular conclusion pertaining to each answer and that
conclusion arrived at by the Experts do not call for any
interference. Alongwith the reply, the respondent-Board, has also
made reference to the material relied on by the Experts for
arriving at a particular conclusion.
Under the directions of the Court, the respondent-Board has
produced the conclusion arrived at by the Experts alongwith the
supporting material for perusal of the Court.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Board made further
