The Supreme Court in the case Koman Soni Versus High Court of Rajasthan asked the Rajasthan High Court to exercise caution pertaining to recruitment of Civil Judges while setting the Question papers and Answer keys.
A Writ Petition was filed before the Rajasthan High Court challenging the deletion and the rejection of other representations under the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 On 22.07.2021, an advertisement was issued for direct recruitment to the posts of Civil Judge Cadre. After the Preliminary Examination was conducted model answer keys were published Several candidates objected on the grounds of the questions being vague, incorrect, misleading as well as the answer keys being incorrect Objections were sought in this regard therefore a Committee of Experts was constituted to examine the said objections. Upon consideration the Committee decided on deleting four questions and rejected the other objections.
The Bench observed:
Considering the grace marks, hardships of individuals as prayed in the petition cannot be allowed.
The Apex Court Relying on the judgments in Kanpur University, through Vice- Chancellor & Others v. Samir Gupta & Others, and the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in the case Arti Meena v. Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, the respondents asserted that the deletion does not inter se affect the merit of the candidates as the merit list has been prepared strictly in accordance with the marks obtained by the candidates keeping in view the provisions in Rule 20 of the Rules of 2010, the petitioner sought that grace marks be given to those who had correctly answered the deleted questions. Among other submissions. Thereafter the petitioners had not succeeded in demonstrating in any of the cases that there was more than one correct answer out of multiplechoice answers to any particular disputed question the Court refused to grant grace marks, The High Court dismissed the Writ Petitions.
The Supreme Court find no reason to interfere with the order of the High Court hence the Supreme Court refused to interfere with its order.
The Bench comprising of Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna noted under the aegis of the High Court for recruitment of Civil Judges and further observed that every year there are some discrepancies in either the question paper itself or the answer keys in the examination conducted.
Justice Shah reckoned:
Every year this is a problem. The High Court should have been taken care and caution of what they are doing when the Question paper was settled?
Justice Shah was further of the opinion that when a expert committee had taken a decision to delete four questions, then judges should exercise caution in interfering with the same the High Court should meticulously considered each and every question that is being deleted and he Justice Shah was not convinced of the view that an order should be passed directing re-evaluation, to address individual hardships.
The students who were losing out the opportunity to appear in the Main Examination by 1- or 2-marks Ms Shobha Beseeched the court to only grant grace marks.
Justice Shah was not being of the opinion of Grace marks and rejected such indulgence by stating Grace marks is a Policy decision.
The Court further asked the Supreme Court Registry to send a copy of the orders to the Chief Justice of High Court of Rajasthan and the Chairman of Recruitment Committee so as to prevent such occurrences in future and further the Court directed the High Court to take care and caution while settling question papers so that the candidates are not put to difficulties.