Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

As already stated there was no objection in either of the writ petition filed for subject Social Science & Mathematics regarding formation of any question or the multiple choice answer was not correct in the bunch of petitions filed.

After reply came to be filed it appears that some objection was raised by the writ petitioners regarding some alleged disputed questions for subjects like Maths and Social Science & paper of General Knowledge. It will be appropriate to quote the order of the learned single Judge dt.7.11.2012 in CWP No. 15609/2012 which reads ad-infra.

As per the advertisement either of the subject Social Science/Maths contained 150 multiple choice question and common paper General Knowledge contained 100 question and each question is of two marks and as it has been pointed out to this Court that the recommendation made by the subject expert Committee initially constituted and later committee constituted by the Commission under the earlier directions of the learned single Judge on general complaints made regarding wrong answers as alleged for subject Social Science/Maths and on recommendations of expert committee as proposed questions were deleted and change was given effect to and revised select list was published on 20.9.2012.
4)A fair play in the joints is a necessary concomitant for an administrative body functioning in an administrative sphere or quasi-administrative sphere. However, the decision must not only be tested by the application of Wednesbury principle of reasonableness, but must be free from arbitrariness not affected by bias or actuated by mala fides;
5) Quashing decisions may impose heavy administrative burden on the administrative and lead to increased and unbudgeted expenditure.

As regards the system of Multiple Choice Objective-type test, Honble the Supreme Court had an occasion to consider such situation in the judgment of Kanpur University V. Samir Gupta (AIR 1983 SC 1230). In that case, in a situation of multiple choice questions, there was challenge to the correctness of some of the answers which were said to be the key answers. The matter was decided by the Allahabad High Court by taking a particular view. While disposing of the appeal, the Supreme Court indicated in Paragraph 18 the principle to be adopted while dealing with such matter. The Supreme Court observed ad infra:

In a system of 'Multiple Choice Objective-type test, care must be taken to see that question having an ambiguous import are not set in the papers. That kind of system of examination involves merely the tick-marking of the correct answer. It leave no scope for reasoning or argument. The answer is 'yes' or 'no'. That is why the questions have to be clear and unequivocal. Lastly, if the attention of the University is drawn to any defect in a key answer or any ambiguity in a question set in the examination, prompt and time decision must be taken by the University to declare that the suspect question will be excluded from the paper and no marks assigned to it.