Allahabad High Court
Pradeep Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 7 Others on 6 October, 2023
Bench: Manoj Kumar Gupta, Donadi Ramesh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:192364-DB
Court No. - 21
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 733 of 2023
Appellant :- Pradeep Kumar Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Seemant Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.
Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.
Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 1 of 2023
1. Heard counsel for the parties.
2. The appeal is reported to be beyond time by 5 days.
3. The explanation offered for the delay is found to be satisfactory.
4. In the interest of justice, the delay is condoned.
5. Office is directed to allot regular number to the instant appeal.
Order on Memo of Appeal
1. The instant intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 21.08.2023 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ - A No. 10667 of 2023 (Pradeep Kumar Yadav vs. State of U.P. and others) by which the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the answer key to question No. 21 of the written examination conducted for selection to the post of Sub Inspector (Civil Police)/Platoon Commander (PAC)/Second Officer, Fire Services in the State of U.P. pursuant to advertisement dated 24.02.2021 was rejected. Consequently, the prayers made by the appellant for quashing the result of written examination and for a mandamus directing the respondents to award him 2.50 marks in respect of question No. 21 in the written examination have also been turned down.
2. The case of the appellant was that he appeared in the selection. He submitted objection against the answer key in respect of question No. 21 of the written examination which was a multiple choice question having four answers, namely, 'A', 'B', 'C' & 'D'. The question was 'Rabi crops are sown in which season?'. The four options were A. Summer, B. Winter, C. Autumn and D. Spring. Petitioner had opted for option 'C' while according to answer key, the correct answer was option 'B'.
3. Learned Single Judge by order dated 27 July 2023 directed that a panel of experts from Agriculture University preferably Chandra Shekhar Azad State Agriculture University Kanpur be constituted to examine the stand of the petitioner and to advise the Court as to whether option 'B' would be the correct answer or option 'C'. In pursuance of the said direction, the Vice Chancellor constituted a Committee of four experts with Dr. P.K. Singh, Director, Agriculture of Research Centre of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanur as Chairman of the Committee. The expert Committee after examining the issue opined that the correct answer was option 'B'. Learned Single Judge in due deference to the opinion of the expert Committee dismissed the writ petition.
4. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the opinion of the expert Committee was incorrect. It had misunderstood the question. According to him the question was very specific to the extent that the information sought from the candidate was with regard to the season in which Rabi crop is sown and not the season during which the crop grows and the flowering takes place. Accordingly to him the expert Committee did not correctly appreciate the question.
5. The expert Committee has placed reliance on a book of Dr. Gopal Chandra De: 'Fundamentals of Economy' which mentions that Rabi crop is grown in winter season which runs from October to February. Accordingly, it opined that option 'B' is the correct answer.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on a judgement of Supreme Court in Kanpur University through Vice Chancellor and others vs. Samit Gupta and others (1983) 4 SCC 309 in submitting that when the answer key on the face of it is apparently wrong, the court is empowered to examine the issue itself.
7. In the said case, the examiner himself had provided the key answers and it was not verified by any committee of experts. The Supreme Court while upholding the case of the students that they had succeeded in proving three of the key answers to be wrong, observed as follows: -
"We agree that the key answer should be assumed to be correct unless it is proved to be wrong and that it should not be held to be wrong by an inferential process of reasoning or by a process of rationalisation. It must be clearly demonstrated to be wrong, that is to say, it must be such as no reasonable body of men well-versed in the particular subject would regard as correct."
8. In Ran Vijay Singh and Others vs. State of U.P. and Others, (2018) 2 SCC 357, the Supreme Court after considering the various judgments on the point, laid down the scope of judicial review in these kind of matters as under: -
?30.3. The court should not at all re-evaluate or scrutinise the answer sheets of a candidate ? it has no expertise in the matter and academic matters are best left to academics;
30.4. The court should presume the correctness of the key answers and proceed on that assumption; and
30.5. In the event of a doubt, the benefit should go to the examination authority rather than to the candidate.?
9. Again in U.P. Public Service Commission vs. Rahul Singh and Another, 2008 (7) SCC 254, the Supreme Court observed that the interference by the court should be minimal and in rarest of rare cases where the mistake is so glaring that it is apparent and no inferential process of reasoning is required to prove that the key answer is wrong. It has again been reiterated that where the key answers have been scrutinized by subject experts, the Court should not arrogate to itself the role of experts. The relevant observations are as under: -
?It can be presumed that these committees consisted of experts in various subjects for which the examinees were tested. Judges cannot take on the role of experts in academic matters. Unless, the candidate demonstrates that the key answers are patently wrong on the face of it, the courts cannot enter into the academic field, weigh the pros and cons of the arguments given by both sides and then come to the conclusion as to which of the answer is better or more correct.?
10. In the instant case, the objections to the key answers were considered by the experts and thereafter the final key answer was notified, according to which, option ?B? is the correct answer. Once again, the committee constituted by the writ court was of the opinion that option ?B? is the correct answer. Moreover, selection relates to the year 2021. The final result was declared on 12.6.2022. The selected candidates must have joined by now. Having regard to the above facts, we decline to interfere with the order of learned Single Judge.
11. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.10.2023
Mukesh Kr.
(Donadi Ramesh,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.)
