Kerala High Court: Imposition of Unaffordable Cost is Akin to Denial of Relief  ||  SC: People Can’t be Asked to Prove Citizenship on Mere Suspicion Without Sharing Material  ||  Bombay High Court: State Government’s Decision to Hike Lease Rentals Not Arbitrary  ||  Bom. HC: State Obligated to Protect Liberty of Foreigners Coming to the Country  ||  Ker. HC: State Govt. to Form SOP for Collection of DNA Samples of Children Surrendered For Adoption  ||  SC: Court Can’t Take Cogni. of Offence Committed by Public Servant Without Following S. 19 of PC Act  ||  Karnataka HC: Illegal to Impose Condition of Furnishing Bank Guarantee While Granting Bail  ||  Allahabad High Court Makes History by Delivering Judgement in Three Languages  ||  Supreme Court: Directions Issued to States/UTs for Prevention of Overcrowding of Prisons  ||  SC: Caution Must be Exercised by Trial Court in Accepting Dock Identification of Accused Without TIP    

Dr. Jitender Kumar vs. Union Of India - (High Court of Delhi) (23 Nov 2022)

Courts do not sit as an Appellate Authority over the decisions taken by the experts



The Appellant seeks to challenge the Order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition which was filed by the Appellant herein for a direction to the Respondent herein to declare afresh his result in paper-II of Orthopaedics specialty in Diplomate of National Board (DnB) Final Theory (Board Specialty) Examination held in December 2020.

In Ran Vijay Singh and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors., the Apex Court, while dealing with interference of Courts in examinations, had deprecated the practice as the same led to prolonging the finality to the results of the examinations.

The present case deals with a wrong question and, therefore, the only question that remains is as to whether the award of marks as per the method adopted by the University warrants any interference by this Court or not. The University has adopted the method of extrapolation across the board in the present case. The method of extrapolation is a well recognized method which is applied by the Universities while evaluating answers when one of the question is wrong.

In light of the judgments of the Apex Court, the Appellant has not been able to substantiate as to how the method adopted by the University is so perverse which would warrant interference from this Court by exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is well settled that the Courts do not sit as an Appellate Authority over the decisions taken by the experts. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the decision taken by the University in the manner of award of marks to the candidates. The Order passed by the learned Single Judge also does not warrant any interference from this Court. Appeal dismissed.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved