Dismissed¶27

Priti Bala D/O Surendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC30 Oct 2025SAW/1266/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Answer key challenge; scope of judicial review under writ jurisdiction; expert committee's reasoned conclusion on answer key not interferable; MOSFET / inbuilt capacitor in MOS transistor question-phrasing grievance; Rajasthan Staff Selection Board (RSMSSB) recruitment examination; Special Appeal Writ dismissed mutatis mutandis following coordinate bench ruling in Vijay Kumar Choudhary (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 960/2025); pending applications disposed; neutral citation [2025:RJ-JP:43498-DB]; decision dated 30/10/2025.

What did the court decide?

The issue raised in the present petition stands already adjudicated by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Vijay Kumar Choudhary & Anr. Vs. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board & Ors., D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 960/2025 and other connected appeals. ¶17

Priti Bala D/O Surendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the present Special Appeal Writ merits interference when the issue raised therein stands already adjudicated by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Vijay Kumar Choudhary (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 960/2025). +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Following the Coordinate Bench ruling, a contention that a question could have been phrased accurately is a grievance that does not fall within the scope of judicial scrutiny in writ jurisdiction of the correctness of the answer key; the expert committee's reasoned conclusion leaves no scope for interference, particularly absent challenge to the material relied upon by the expert committee.

¶23

Key takeaways

Keeping in view the Coordinate Bench decision in Vijay Kumar Choudhary, the present Special Appeal Writ is dismissed, mutatis mutandis.ratio¶27
All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench, DB: Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, Acting CJ and Baljinder Singh Sandhu, J.; order dated 30/10/2025) in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1266/2025: Four appellants raised an answer-key grievance identical to one already rejected by the Coordinate Bench. Following Vijay Kumar Choudhary & Anr. Vs. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board & Ors., D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 960/2025 and connected appeals, the Court reiterated that a complaint that a question (concerning the inbuilt capacitor in a MOS transistor versus use of the term MOSFET) could have been phrased accurately is merely a drafting grievance and does not fall within the scope of judicial scrutiny in writ jurisdiction of the correctness of an answer key; the expert committee having arrived at a reasoned conclusion leaves no scope for interference, more so absent any challenge to the material relied upon by it. The Special Appeal Writ was dismissed, mutatis mutandis, and all pending applications were disposed of. No relief was granted to the appellants.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:43498-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1266/2025

¶4

Priti Bala D/o Surendra Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 254, Vikas Nager Near By R.b.m. Hospital District Bharatpur, Rajasthan-321001.

¶5

Sunita Kumari D/o Rohitasw Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan-333026.

¶6

Bhanupriya Dagdi D/o Sukhdev Dagdi, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Post Kharwa, Tehsil Masuda, District Ajmer, Rajasthan-305202.

¶7

Sarita Sukhwal D/o Ramesh Chandra Menaria, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Sawa Dsitrict Chittorgarh, Rajasthan312613.

¶8

----Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Information Technologies And Communications, Secretariate, Jaipur.

¶11

Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministerial Service Selection Board (Rsmssb), Through Its Secretary, State Institute Of Agriculture Management Primises, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302018

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Nitin Pareek, Adv. for Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) :

¶14

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

¶15

Order

¶16

30/10/2025

¶17

The issue raised in the present petition stands already adjudicated by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Vijay Kumar

¶18

Choudhary & Anr. Vs. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board &

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[2025:RJ-JP:43498-DB]

¶21

[SAW-1266/2025]

¶22

Ors.: D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 960/2025 and other connected appeals, wherein this Court held as under:-

¶23

“The contention raised that in case inbuilt capacitor as is used in MOS Transistor was to be considered the term MOSFET should have been used in the question, is in fact a grievance that the question could have been phrased accurately. The contention does not fall within the scope of judicial scrutiny in writ jurisdiction of the correctness of the answer key.

¶24

The expert committee having examined the answer key and arrived at a reasoned conclusion leaves no scope for interference by this Court in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction. Given the well-settled principles governing judicial review of answer keys in public examinations, the learned Single Judge was justified in declining to interfere with the findings of the expert committee more so, in absence of challenge to the material relied by the expert committee.

¶25

No case is made out for interference in the intra court appeals, the same are dismissed.”

¶26