Batch of writ petitions (lead case: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16144/2024, with the Board's reply therein treated as the standard reply to all) concerning direct recruitment to the post of Informatics Assistant, 2023 advertised by the Rajasthan Subordinate and Ministerial Service Selection Board (RSMSSB) — 2730 posts vide advertisement dated 16.01.2023, increased to 3415 vide amended advertisement dated 27.06.2024; written examination held 21.01.2024. After objections to the preliminary answer key (published 02.02.2024; objection window 05.02.2024–07.02.2024) were examined by Subject Experts, the final answer key dated 01.07.2024 changed the answer to Question No.125 from (C) to (B) and left answers to Questions No.12, 50, 89 and 127 unchanged, with the final result declared the same day. During arguments the challenge was confined to these five questions, with a joint prayer for a fresh Committee of Subject Experts and revision of the result. Held, dismissing the petitions: (i) the scope of judicial review under Article 226 over the correctness of answer-key answers in public examinations is extremely narrow, if not completely shut out — following Ran Vijay Singh (2018) 2 SCC 357, Kanpur University (1983) 4 SCC 309, Vikesh Kumar Gupta (2021) 2 SCC 309 and West Bengal Central School Service Commission (2019) 18 SCC 39, and the Coordinate Bench ruling in Surjan Lal Dhawan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4777/2021) as affirmed by the Division Bench in Sanjay Kumar Bhaskar (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 636/2024); key answers are presumed correct unless clearly demonstrated wrong without any inferential process of reasoning or rationalization; (ii) the Court is not an expert and cannot substitute its opinion for that of the Subject Experts, who relied on authentic material; no arbitrariness, bias or mala fides was alleged against the Board or the Experts, and no unfairness or paper leak in the process was claimed; (iii) no clear-cut/apparent error on the face of the five answers was demonstrated and no prima facie case for a fresh Expert Committee was made out; (iv) Vanshika Yadav ((2024) 10 SCC 641 — NEET UGC-2024 paper leak) and Ramdhan Kumawat (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10622/2014) were distinguished as inapplicable on their facts. Consequences: interim stay orders staying the appointment of selected candidates were vacated, and stay/pending applications were disposed of. (Judgment dated 03/07/2025; Sudesh Bansal, J.)
