Explore the complexities of judicial review in the context of a recent legal case concerning the selection of teachers. The High Court’s analysis of the Answer Key and the role of Expert Committees sheds light on the challenges faced in appointment processes. Discover the importance of expertise and deference to specialized knowledge in academic assessments.
Facts
- Appellants challenged the correctness of 33 questions which required referral to an Expert Committee.
- Names of the Petitioners were mentioned in the list of selected candidates but could not be appointed due to defects in detail forms.
- RPSC issued an advertisement for selection of 9,551 Senior Teachers in various subjects.
- Written examinations were conducted on specific dates for General Knowledge and Social Science.
- Writ Petitions were filed in the High Court by the Appellants aggrieved by non-selection.
- Writ Petitions were disposed along with a connected Writ Petition.
- Points for consideration in all Appeals were found to be the same.
- RPSC issued Answer Key and declared results on a specific date.
- Confusion caused by divergent directions given by different benches of the High Court regarding selection to the posts of Senior Teachers.
- Direction by a Single Judge to delete names of ineligible candidates from the Select List and issue a revised list.
- Benefit of revision of Answer Key given only to the specific appellants in a special appeal writ.
- Referral of questions in the Answer Key for reconsideration by an Expert Committee.
- Direction by Division Bench to revise Select List and give benefit only to specific appellants before the Court.
- Appeal filed questioning the correctness of the Division Bench’s judgment.
- Implementation of direction to revise Select List by excluding ineligible candidates.
- Division Bench holding that the revision direction only applied to specific appellants.
- Issuance of revised Select List based on revised Answer Key, approved by Division Bench for selection and appointments.
- Appeal against judgment referring questions for reconsideration, finding non-disclosure of previous relevant judgment to the Single Judge.
- High Court independently examining disputed questions and finding incorrect answers to some.
- Preparation of Waiting List by RPSC based on the revised Answer Key.
- Grievance of appellants regarding preparation of revised Select List, Appeal against interim order, disposal of Writ Petition by Division Bench.
- Setting aside of interim order in favor of appellants, upholding of Waiting List by Division Bench.
- Referral of further questions for reconsideration by Expert Committee.
- Stay on appointments to the post of Senior Teachers and subsequent challenge by selected candidates.
- Setting aside of stay order by Division Bench.
- Revision of Key Answers by Expert Committee and issuance of revised Merit List excluding the petitioners.
Also Read: Legal Analysis on Admission Denial and Seat Creation in Medical College Case
Issue
- Whether judgment dated 12.03.2019 of the Division Bench of the High Court in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.922 of 2018 can be restricted only to the Appellants therein.
Also Read: Legal Analysis on Seniority Fixation in Contempt Petitions
Arguments
- The Appellants contend that the Wait List should also be prepared on the basis of the 3 Answer Key and not the 2 Answer Key.
- Dr. Manish Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel for the State of Rajasthan, mentioned that every selection process by the State faces litigation, causing delays in appointments to public posts.
- The counsel for the Appellants suggested that there are vacancies that can be filled by appointing the Appellants, but doing so at this stage might create confusion and unsettle previous appointments made under the 13.07.2016 advertisement.
- The judgment of the Division Bench dated 12.03.2019 was implemented only for the Appellants before the High Court, and the remaining appointments were delayed due to an interim order by the Court on 06.09.2019.
- The Appellants’ grievance is that the Select List should have been revised by applying the 3 Answer Key prepared based on the judgment dated 12.03.2019.
Also Read: Vertical Mobility and Selection Process in Police Department
Analysis
- Courts should be very slow in interfering with expert opinion in academic matters.
- Assessment of questions by the courts to arrive at correct answers is not permissible.
- Delay in finalization of appointments to public posts is often due to cases challenging selections pending in courts for a long time.
- Re-evaluation and scrutiny of questions by courts lacking expertise in academic matters is deprecated.
- Examination authorities are under scrutiny, not the candidates, leading to an unenviable position.
- Delay in appointments results in temporary positions continuing and claims for regularization.
- Sympathy or compassion does not influence the decision on re-evaluation of answer sheets.
- Both candidates and examination authorities put in significant efforts, and internal checks and balances should be considered before court interference.
- Errors in examination process affect all candidates
- Judicial review of re-evaluation of answer sheets should be limited
- Courts should not re-evaluate answer sheets as they lack expertise
- High Court should not examine question papers and answer sheets
- Deference should be shown to Expert Committees’ recommendations
- The RPSC has vacancies that can be filled by the appellants
- Direction given to RPSC and State Government to fill existing vacancies from the Wait List based on merit
- No setting aside of judgment
- Inordinate delay in approaching court not necessary to be adjudicated upon
- Selection process to be completed within 8 weeks from today
Decision
- Appeals dismissed due to 5 out of 21 appellants already being appointed
- Division Bench made an error in assessing 5 questions and experts’ opinions
- Upholding of Select List dated 21.05.2019 and Wait List dated 22.05.2019 based on Answer Key
Case Title: VIKESH KUMAR GUPTA Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN (2020 INSC 681)
Case Number: C.A. No.-003649-003650 / 2020
