The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of The District & Sessions Judge (HQs) & Anr. vs Narender Kumar consisting of Justices Sanjeev Narula and Rajiv Shakdher reiterated that Courts must refrain from impinging on an academic evaluator’s jurisdiction by re-assessing answer sheets.
Facts
Review Petitioners sought review of the impugned judgement whereby the appeals preferred by Respondent were allowed and order of learned Single Judge re-evaluating Review Petitioners’ typing sheets in examination for Lower Division Clerk (“LDC”) was set aside. Since the grounds of review are nearly identical, the petitions are being disposed of by way of this common order.
Contentions Made
Petitioner: It was contended that the Court wrongly proceeded on the assumption that Review Petitioners were seeking re-evaluation; whereas, they were only requesting for re-calculation of marks, which is legally permissible for the Court to direct. It was also contended that although the scope of judicial review may not permit the Court to assume the role of an examiner and substitute its own views and rationale with that of examiner, an exception is carved out in the case of re-totalling of marks.
Observations of the Court
The Bench noted that the Learned Single Judge had merely evaluated the method of calculation of marks awarded to Review Petitioners and did not engage in re-assessment of the typing sheets or mistakes committed therein. There was no digression of the bounds of judicial review by encroaching upon the exclusive domain of expert examiner, as observed in the impugned order.
It also noted that the principal contention for seeking review was that the learned Single Judge did not indulge in re-evaluation of marks of Review Petitioners, but merely corrected the error in calculation of marks. But that aforesaid ground was not urged before this Court during hearing of the appeals. Thus, it opined that they cannot be permitted to assail impugned judgement on grounds that were previously in their knowledge, but not urged. Unless the conditions mentioned in O47R1 CPC are demonstrated, the Court cannot review its order.
Judgment
Since Review Applicants failed to demonstrate any mistake or error apparent on the face of record, no ground was made out to set aside the impugned judgement.
Case: The District & Sessions Judge (HQs) & Anr. vs Narender Kumar
Citation: Rev.P.No.72/2021 in LPA No.123/2019
Bench: Justice Sanjeev Narula, Justice Rajiv Shakdher
Decided on: 7th October 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
