Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Ms. Trivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that in terms of paragraph XV of the Appendix to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970, if there is any litigation that involves totaling, evaluation or re-evaluation of the answer-sheets;

the answer-sheets are required to be preserved. She contended that this clearly implies that in certain cases where litigation is instituted, the court can direct re-evaluation of the answer sheets.

"XII RE-EVALUATION OF ANSWER SHEETS There shall be no re-evaluation of answer sheets in respect of Preliminary Examination and Mains Examination. No request for re-evaluation of answer sheets shall be entertained and the same shall be liable to be rejected without any notice to the candidates.

10. It is clear from the paragraph XII of the Appendix to the Rules as set out above that the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970 expressly prohibit re-evaluation of the answer-sheets. The contention that the paragraph XV of the Appendix to the said rules indicates that re-evaluation is permissible in certain cases where litigation is instituted, is unpersuasive. A plain reading of paragraph XV provides that the answer-sheets and the examination material would be preserved in case of any litigation that may involve reference to the said material. The said paragraph cannot be construed to mean that it would be permissible for the courts to direct re-evaluation of answer-sheets contrary to the relevant rules.

16. The proposition that absent specific provisions permitting re- evaluation of examination answer-sheets, the same is impermissible, is not without exception. In Ran Vijay Singh & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.: (2018) 2 SCC 357, the Supreme Court had observed as under: -

"30.2 If a statute, Rule or Regulation governing an examination does not permit re-evaluation or scrutiny of an answer sheet (as distinct from prohibiting it) then the court may permit re-evaluation or scrutiny only if it is demonstrated very clearly, without any "inferential process of reasoning or by a process of rationalisation" and only in rare or exceptional cases that a material error has been committed;"