Delhi High Court
Surjeet & Ors vs Central Board Of Secondary ... on 1 February, 2019
$~51
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 1st February, 2019
+ W.P.(C) 1068/2019 & CM No. 4865/2019
SURJEET & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Manoj Kr. Bhatnagar and
Mr. A.P.S. Jadaun, Advs.
versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY
EDUCATION (CBSE) & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Amit Bansal and
Ms. Seema Dolo, Advs. for R-1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
% J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The grievance of the petitioner is regarding certain errors - as
he perceives them to be - in the answer key issued and circulated by
the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) in respect of the
Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) held by it on 9th December,
2018, in which the petitioner participated. According to the petitioner,
certain answers, in the answer key, were erroneous. The writ petition
complains that though the said errors were pointed out by the
petitioner, in his representation to the CBSE, the revised answer key,
as circulated by the CBSE, did not correct the said errors.
2. While examining such matters, the jurisdiction of this Court is
circumscribed by the law, well settled in this regard, in a catena of
pronouncements by the Supreme Court. One may refer, with
advantage, to a recent decision, in UPPSC v. Rahul Singh, (2018) 7
SCC 254. In the said case, too, the candidate was aggrieved with the
answer key issued by the authority concerned. In para 12 to 14 of the
judgment, the Supreme Court cautioned all Courts, dealing with such
matters, in the following words :
"12. The law is well settled that the onus is on the
candidate to not only demonstrate that the key answer is
incorrect but also that it is a glaring mistake which is
totally apparent and no inferential process or reasoning
is required to show that the key answer is wrong. The
Constitutional Courts must exercise great restraint in
such matters and should be reluctant to entertain a plea
challenging the correctness of the key answers. In Kanpur
University case (supra), the Court recommended a system
of - (1) moderation; (2) avoiding ambiguity in the
questions; (3) prompt decisions be taken to exclude
suspected questions and no marks be assigned to such
questions.
13. As far as the present case is concerned even before
publishing the first list of key answers the Commission
had got the key answers moderated by two expert
committees. Thereafter, objections were invited and a 26
member committee was constituted to verify the
objections and after this exercise the 9 Committee
recommended that 5 questions be deleted and in 2
questions, key answers be changed. 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.
14. In the present case we find that all the 3 questions
needed a long process of reasoning and the High Court
itself has noticed that the stand of the Commission is also
supported by certain text books. When there are
conflicting views, then the court must bow down to the
opinion of the experts. Judges are not and cannot be
experts in all fields and, therefore, they must exercise
great restraint and should not overstep their jurisdiction to
upset the opinion of the experts."
(Emphasis Supplied)
3. Viewed in the background of the law as enunciated in Rahul
Singh (supra), I am of the opinion that no case for interference by this
Court in the present matter can be said to exist.
4. The grievance of the petitioner relates to the answers to
Question Nos. 4, 12, 66, 71, 81, 85, 90, 95 and 110 in the answer key.
A tabulated representation of the questions, the answers as contained
in the answer key circulated by the CBSE, and the correct answer, in
the perception of the petitioner, may be provided thus:
Question. Question Answer in the Correct answer
answer key according to the
No.
petitioner
4. Teacher can (4) know (1) know learning
utilize both children needs of child and
assessment for progress and select teaching
learning and achievement strategy
assessment of
learning to - level accordingly.
12 Which one of (1) Fear (1) Fear
the following (3) Stimulus
is an emotion?
66 The rate of (2) Surface Area (1) Temperature
dissolution of (2) Surface Area
a solute (4) Pressure
depends on -
71 In EVS (4) Going (1) Linking text
teaching beyond the text book to global
learning; book environmental
linking issues and
classroom, concerns
learning to life
outside school
and enriching
it implies -
81 Women are (4) Myth (2) Stereotype
weaker than
men; It is a -
85 Which (3) "NCF 1975" (4) "NCF 2005"
National
Curriculum
Framework
(NCF)
recommended
Environmental
Studies to be
taught as an
integrated
curricular area
at the primary
level ?
90 Which one of (1) Sulphur (1) Sulphur
the following Dioxide Dioxide
is responsible (4) Nitrogen
for turning Taj Dioxide
Mahal yellow?
95 According to (4) Second (3) Global
the
observation in
the National
Curriculum
Framework
(NCF)-2005,
English is a
_____language
in India
110 Which of the (3) Pravah (1) Jay Mala
following (3) Pravah
words is not a
synonym of
the word sarit?
(Translated)
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner emphatically submits that the
answers as suggested by him conform to the NCERT text books,
which, even as per the CBSE, had to constitute the basis of working
out the answers to the questions.
6. As already noted hereinabove, the jurisdiction of this Court, in
such matters, is heavily circumscribed. It is not for this Court to re-
evaluate the correctness of the answers contained in the answer key
provided by the CBSE. There may be extreme situations, where the
error in the answer key is self-evident. For example, if the question
sought is the sum of 4+2, there can be only one possible answer to it
which is 6. If, therefore, the answer key of the CBSE suggests another
answer, for example 7, this Court would immediately interfere, as the
error is self-evident.
7. The perusal of the questions and answers, with which the
petitioner is aggrieved, however discloses that the answers to the
questions are not self-evident. No doubt, if one were to proceed into a
detailed analysis and reasoning of the questions, peruse textbooks and
re-analyse the nature of the questions, it may be possible that what the
petitioner states is correct. Such an exercise, however, cannot be
undertaken by this Court, in exercise of the power of judicial review
as provided by Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
8. It is not disputed that, consequent to the receipt of objections, a
revised answer key was issued by the CBSE after the suggestions
received were examined by experts. Mr. Bansal, learned counsel for
the CBSE, points out that individual responses to the various
candidates could hardly be expected, keeping in mind the number of
objections which were received and the time constraints within which
the results had to be announced. He submits, that after a holistic
apprehension of all the objections received by them, the CBSE had
issued a revised answer key, and that this Court ought to let the matter
rest at that.
9. The submission of Mr. Bansal, in my view, is well taken. In
matters such as this, the Court would be well advised not to sit as an
appellate authority over the decision of the CBSE, regarding the
correct answers to the questions. To reiterate, where the error is not
self-evident, the Court cannot reappreciate the questions, or assess for
itself the correct answers thereto.
10. For all the above reasons, this Court regrets that it is unable to
come to the aid of the petitioner. The writ petition is, therefore,
dismissed with no orders as to costs.
Dasti.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J
FEBRUARY 01, 2019/kr
