The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed review petitions and a miscellaneous application challenging an order directing an Expert Committee for re-evaluation of District Judge exam answer-sheets. The Court held that modifying the order via review would illegally alter directions already upheld by the Apex Court.
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.
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Review Petition No. 93/2024
In
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17542/2022
(2 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
(3 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
Rajasthan
(4 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
Enclave Vijayapura Road, Purani Chungi, Agra Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
----Proforma-Respondents/Writ Petitioners
(5 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
Connected With
D.B. Civil Review Petition No. 101/2024
In
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17763/2022
--Petitioners
Versus
–-Respondents
(6 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
Years, Resident Of Village Undra, Post Veerwara, Sirohi, Rajasthan.
In
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8083/2023
(7 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
Chawla, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of B-82, Triveni Nagar, Gopal Pura Bye Pas, Jaipur
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Kamlakar Sharma, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Madhusudan Singh Rajpurohit, in D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No.93/2024, |
|---|---|
| Mr. Angad Mirdha, in D.B. Review Petition | |
| (Writ) No.101/2024 & | |
| Mr. Sunil Samdaria, in D.B. Writ | |
| Miscellaneous Application No.113/2024 | |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Vigyan Shah |
(8 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order
RESERVED ON :: 19.07.2024 PRONOUNCED ON :: 23.07.2024
(Per Hon’ble Pankaj Bhandari, J.)
“12. We therefore, deem it proper to request Justice Govind Mathur, former Judge of Rajasthan High Court and former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court to look into the answersheets and communicate his views, suggestions and findings.
(9 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
order dated 14.02.2024, had passed the following directions, which are as under:-
“33. We, therefore, deem it proper to direct the Examination Cell of the High Court to constitute an Expert Committee consisting of Eminent Jurists/Professors. The Expert Committee would pick up 20 copies of each paper randomly and shall examine and evaluate the same and while evaluating the answer-sheets, the Expert Committee will be free to take into consideration the length of the paper and the time provided for answering the questions. The Examination Cell shall mask the numbers, which the candidates have obtained and then provide it to the Expert Committee. After the copies are evaluated, the Examination Cell shall prepare a tabular chart depicting the marks awarded presently and the marks awarded after the copies are examined by the Expert Committee. The average difference in the marks, be it more or less should then be brought to the notice of the High Court. The High Court while considering the same and for maintaining efficiency in service would take a decision on administrative side as to whether:
(10 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
to the outcome of the above exercise. We make it clear that secrecy would be maintained with regard to the copies picked up for re- valuation by the Expert Committee and marks awarded by the Expert Committee and tabular chart prepared by the Examination Cell shall not be provided to any candidate. Looking to the controversy and allegations with regard to evaluation by Officers of the District Judge Cadre, we deem it proper to advise the Examination Cell to get the copies examined by Eminent Jurists/Professors in ensuing examinations.”
(11 of 11)
[2024:RJ-JP:30386-DB]
[WRW-93/2024]
apparent on the face of the order. The Special Leave Petition preferred by the High Court against the impugned order has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The mechanism, as provided by the High Court cannot be changed in exercise of review jurisdiction.
(BHUWAN GOYAL),J
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
AMIT/1, 2 & 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners could invoke review jurisdiction to seek inclusion of specific answer-sheets or restriction to their own copies under the re-evaluation scheme.
Whether the report of the Expert Committee should have been placed before the High Court on the judicial side instead of the administrative side.
Pradeep Malik and others
The Registrar (Examination), Rajasthan High Court
State of Rajasthan
Pankaj Bhandari
Bhuvan Goyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
