Bombay High Court: ‘GIRNAR’ a Well Known Trademark in India  ||  Kerala HC: Criminal Courts of District Judiciary Cannot Recall their Earlier Orders  ||  Madras HC: Only ‘Preponderance of Probability’ Required in Disciplinary Proceedings  ||  Raj HC: Non-Disclosure of Information Wasn’t a Ground for Disqualification Before 2015 Amendment Act  ||  Bom. HC: Workers in Statutory Canteens are Principal Employer’s Employees  ||  Supreme Court: NCLAT Cannot Use its ‘Inherent Powers’ to Subvert Legal Provisions  ||  Supreme Court: NCLAT Cannot Use its ‘Inherent Powers’ to Subvert Legal Provisions  ||  SC Refuses to Mark Presence of Advocate Who Did Not Argue the Matter  ||  SC Sets Aside HC’s Decision to Accept Aadhaar Card as a Proof of Date of Birth  ||  SC Permits Candidate with Blindness to Attend Interview for Selection of Civil Judges in Rajasthan    

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

MANU/DE/4779/2022

Education

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.

Tags : RESULT   DECLARATION   DIRECTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved