are not inclined to accept the contention raised on behalf of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners that the keyanswers provided by the respondent Commission for evaluating the answersheets of the petitioners were wrong or that despite there being a report by the Expert Committee the Court must take in hand the exercise of finding out as to whether the key-answers are correct or wrong. There is no need to go into the plea raised by the petitioners for examining the disputed questions and the authenticity of the keyanswers provided by the respondent Commission in view of the report of the Expert Committee constituted for the purpose. Surely, the Court is not an expert in the field of education and the various subjects from which the question paper was settled. Expert Committee constituted for the purpose has given its report based upon recognised text books authored by persons of repute in the field. There is no allegation, whatsoever that the members constituting the Committee did not know or had no specialisation in the concerned subjects nor is there any allegation of bias against them. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no occasion at all arises for the Court to further probe the matter. The contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners needs thus no further comments. Suffice is it, however, to motion
