0

Orissa HC Rejects Challenge to Evaluation in Teachers Recruitment Exam: “May Seem Plausible on Grounds of Natural Justice, May Not Be Possible Legally”

In the case of Rabindra Panigrahi v. State of Odisha & Ors. (Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 33961 of 202, Order Dated- 20th May 2022, Coram- Justice S.K. Panigrahi), a candidate’s appeal challenging the evaluation procedure of the exam held for the hiring of contractual Hindi teachers in government secondary schools was recently dismissed by the Orissa High Court. The Single Bench of Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi said in dismissing the writ petition, “The court must consider just what is legitimately achievable, not what might be conceivable outside of the legal system. On the basis of natural justice, something might sound plausible, yet it might not be legal. It is not practical to extend the vista of natural justice included in the Audi alteram partem rule to the twilight zone of mere expectations, no matter how lofty they may be, as Mathew, J. aptly said in his decision in the Union of India v. M.L. Kapur case.”

Facts: The Court noted that if the petitioner had a complaint about the questions being outside of the curriculum, they should have been brought up within the allotted time Le., 06.10.2021-08.10.2021 (3 days). The petitioner claimed in his response affidavit that he was unable to make his argument because he was attending to the medical needs of his family members on the dates set aside for addressing the question-paper discrepancy. The petitioner’s request to have the answer script re-evaluated was denied, according to the ruling, because the candidates who passed the relevant exam have been employed since 12.15.2021.


Judgement:
The Court noted that if the petitioner had a complaint about the questions being outside of the curriculum, they should have been brought up within the allotted time Le., 06.10.2021-08.10.2021 (3 days). The petitioner claimed in his response affidavit that he was unable to make his argument because he was attending to the medical needs of his family members on the dates set aside for addressing the question-paper discrepancy. The petitioner’s request to have the answer script revaluated was denied, according to the ruling, because the candidates who passed the relevant exam have been employed since 12.15.2021. The Court cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case of Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and Anr. v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kurmarsheth, in which it was stated that “The Court should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent, and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich experience of actual day-to-day working of educational institutions.” The Court stated that this removes any prospect of human participation in the examination and evaluation because the current set of circumstances indicate that the examination was a computer-based test. Therefore, it is essential that the proper procedure involved in the evaluation of answer scripts be followed without interference from courts due to the lack of evidence suggesting potential misconduct. Additionally, it cited another Supreme Court ruling in this regard, H.P Public Service Commission v. Mukesh Thakur & Anr, where it was stated: “The High Court was not allowed to review the question-and-answer sheets for itself, especially after the Commission had determined the candidates’ relative merits. If there was an error in how the question was phrased or how the answer was evaluated, it might have affected all of the exam-takers and not just Respondent No. 1. The High Court’s random inspection of the law-related response sheets is a matter of luck. We are unable to comprehend whether the High Court could have authorised such a course had it been in another field, such as physics, chemistry, or mathematics.”

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY SNIGDHA DUBEY

Click here to view judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat