Delhi High Court - Orders
Mohamed Anwar vs National Testing Agency & Anr on 4 November, 2022
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~271
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15279/2022 CM APPL. 47399/2022
MOHAMED ANWAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhik Chimni and Mr. Ch.
Animes Prusty, Advocates.
versus
NATIONAL TESTING AGENCY & ANR. ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Seema Dolo, Adv for R-1/ NTA.
Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Ms. Nidhi Mittal
and Ms. Aparna Arun, Advs for R-
2/UGC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 04.11.2022
1. The Petitioner, a candidate of UGC NET Exam (December 2020-June 2021 Merged Cycle), with 'Urdu' as chosen NET subject, appeared for the exam on 24th November, 2021, and challenges the final answer key to question ID No. 1955. Of the four multiple choice options thereto, he had opted for option (iii). The provisional answer key published by NTA declared the correct answer to be option (i). Admittedly, Petitioner did not challenge the provisional answer key during the window provided for doing so. After challenges were raised by other candidates during the above-mentioned window, the correct answer was changed by NTA, and final answer key reflected the correct answer to be option (ii).
2. The cut-off for Urdu for the students belonging to Other Backward Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:07.11.2022 16:44:54 Classes-Non Creamy Layer (OBC-NCL) candidates was 178 marks, and the Petitioner, who belongs to the same, has secured 176 marks. He is now seeking a mandamus for directing NTA to award him two additional marks for attempting the instant question. The foundation for this claim is that candidates who have marked either option (i) or option (ii) have been awarded marks for the question, and given that the question was vague, ambiguous and open to interpretation, basis which Petitioner had marked option (iii), Petitioner should be given marks for attempting this question.
3. In the prima facie opinion of this Court, it has been unequivocally published in the information bulletin of UGC-NET (December 2020 and June 2021 Merged Cycle), that the decision of NTA on the challenges raised will be final and the result will be declared on the basis of the final answer key. NTA's final decision is that both option (i) and (ii) are being awarded marks. However, that does not entitle the Petitioner to claim marks for option (iii) chosen by him, which is clearly not one of the two options where marks are being awarded in the instant question ID.
4. The Petitioner's reliance on the order dated 22nd July 2022 in an earlier petition,1 wherein a challenge was laid to the same question ID of the same exam, is also misplaced, because, in the facts of that case, the Petitioner therein had chosen option (i). This, as narrated above, as per NTA's revised policy, was also found eligible to be awarded marks. Accordingly, NTA had itself offered to revise his marks and the petition was disposed of in that light. This is manifestly not the case here.
5. Nevertheless, as Petitioner's prayers are premised only on the ground 1 In W.P.(C) 7756/2022 titled Mohd. Akhlaq v. National Testing Agency & Anr.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:07.11.2022 16:44:54that NTA has not divulged the reasoning for accepting option (ii) as correct, which makes it vague/arbitrary, and liable to allotting of marks for attempting the question, Ms. Seema Dolo, counsel for NTA, seeks and is granted time to take instructions on this aspect.
6. Renotify on 10th November, 2022.
SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 4, 2022/PS Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:07.11.2022 16:44:54