The High Court dismissed an appeal challenging a Single Judge's order upholding the Rajasthan Public Service Commission's assessment. The Court held that judicial review in examination assessments by expert bodies is limited and found no scope for interference.
The appeal was dismissed upholding the order dated 19.01.2021.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 148/2021
Mukesh Saini S/o Shri Panchu Mal Saini, Aged About 33 Years, R/o 678, Sumer Nagar, Agarwal Farm Mansarovar, Jaipur.
----Appellant
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Radhika Maharwal on behalf of Mr. Kunal Kant Rawat through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Panwar on behalf of Mr. Ravi Chirania through VC
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Judgment
20/01/2022
This appeal is filed in order to challenge the order of the learned Single Judge dated 19.01.2021 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.32/2021. The appellant-original petitioner had participated in the selection process undertaken by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (for short ‘the RPSC’) for various posts in non-TSP area. The RPSC had conducted a written test of MCQs. The result declared showed that the petitioner had scored 228.651 marks. He was placed in the select list however the case of the petitioner is that there was error in relation to four such questions and answers. According to the petitioner, two of these questions
(2 of 3)
[SAW-148/2021]
were wrongly deleted and to which the petitioner had given correct answer and in respect to the other two questions though the petitioner had given correct answers, according to the petitioner, the correct answers declared by the RPSC were wrong and those attempted by the petitioner were right. According to the petitioner if all these errors were eliminated his score would go up and he would have got better placement. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition primarily on the ground that when such examinations for recruitment to the public posts are being conducted by an expert body Court’s interference in the assessments should be minimum. It is this judgment of the learned Single Judge the petitioner has challenged in this appeal.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at considerable length. It is well settled through series of judgments of Supreme Court that the scope of judicial review against the decisions of the expert bodies particularly in the field of education and other technical fields is limited. When it comes to conducting examinations and tests for recruitment on public posts, the Courts have due regard and respect for the expertise of the bodies such as Public Service Commission and Staff Selection Commission. Until and unless the concerned questions or their answers are shown to be absolutely unpalatable and unacceptable, the analysis and the view of the expert bodies is not overruled. As is well known, whenever a dispute with relation to correctness of the question itself or the correct choice contained in the examination paper arise, the committees of experts are firm to take a proper decision. It is well-known that on many occasions on account of some confusions or defect in the question itself, the question is
(3 of 3)
[SAW-148/2021]
deleted altogether so that no candidate suffers on account of incorrect question or incorrect choice of answers.
Thus though there is no absolute bar of judicial review against the decisions of such expert bodies, the scope is necessarily limited. Reference in this respect is made to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Vikesh Kumar Gupta and Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.-CW No.3649-3650/2020 decided on 07.12.2020 . Reference to which is also made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment.
We do not find that the learned Single Judge has committed any error. We have read and re-read the questions and the multiple options given by the examiner. We do not find any scope for interference.
The appeal is dismissed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
(AKIL KURESHI),CJ
N. Gandhi/76
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the assessment decisions of the expert body RPSC regarding deleted or wrongly answered questions in a public service examination.
Whether the impugned order dismissing the writ petition against RPSC's assessment lacked any error.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vikesh Kumar Gupta and Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.Referred¶21
Vikesh Kumar Gupta and Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.-CW No.3649-3650/2020
Mukesh Saini
The Chairman, Rajasthan Staff Selection Board
The Secretary, Rajasthan Staff Selection Board
Akil Kureshi
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
