[Rajasthan Judicial Service] High Court Issues Notice In Another Plea Challenging 2021 Prelims Answer Key

The aforesaid exam was conducted on 28.11.2021 and its final result was declared on 11.01.2022.

Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Birendra Kumar, ruled,

"Issue notice to respondents on payment of P.F. by 31.01.2022, returnable on or before 16.02.2022. List this matter on 16.02.2022."

The petitioner filed the plea on the following grounds arising in C Series of Answer Key::

(a) In Question No. 46, it has two correct answers as Option No. 1 and Option No. 3 whereas the respondents have provided only Option No. 1 as the correct answer;

(b) In Question No. 68, Option No. 2 and Option No. 4 both are correct answers whereas the respondents have provided only Option No. 2 as correct answer;

(c) In Question No. 73, Option No. 2 and Option No. 4 both are correct answers whereas the respondents have provided only Option No. 2 as the correct answer.

In addition, the plea also sought direction to the respondents to invite the petitioner for the Main examination.

The plea was filed by one Ved Prakash Chokdayat through Advocates Aditya Jain, Neha Gyamlani, Bhavya Golecha and Manmohan Dayma.

The matter is next listed on 16.02.2022.

Similar Plea Before Principal Bench

Similarly, on 07.02.2022, the Principal Bench at Jodhpur also issued notice in a similar writ petition seeking directions to the respondents to rectify the final answer key of Civil Judge Cadre of Rajasthan Judicial Services (Preliminary Examination) and to award bonus marks to all the candidates.

The bench comprising Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani and Justice Sandeep Mehta, observed,

"Issue notice of the writ petition as well as stay petition to the respondents. 'Dasti' service is permitted. Rule is made returnable on 17.2.2022."

Adv. Arpit Samaria, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, also sought relief for recomputation of marks, and thereby to prepare a list of eligible candidates by including all such candidates therein, who secured more marks than the last candidate originally allowed to appear in the main examination. He prayed that apart from the originally allowed candidates, newly included candidates be also permitted in the eligibility list to appear in the main examination.

Also Read: [Rajasthan Judicial Services] High Court Issues Notices In Plea Challenging 2021 Prelims Answer Key & For Non-Reduction Of Cut-Off Marks For ST Widow Category

Similar Plea Challenging Answer Key & For Non-Reduction of Cut-off Marks For ST Widow Category

Notably, on 27.01.2022, the same bench of Rajasthan High Court had issued notice in a similar plea challenging multiple questions of the aforesaid exam on the grounds that such questions were either wrongly deleted, wrongly reframed, out of syllabus or answers provided were not in conformity with the recent amendment in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

The petitioner had alleged that she was awarded 50 marks, yet she has not been selected for main examination by subjecting her to discrimination. She alleged that for the first time different criteria of cut off marks has been provided for various categories/subcategories and though reduced cut off marks have been provided to General Widow as 45, no such reduced cut off marks have been provided for Scheduled Tribe Widow.

Dismissal of the Challenge by the Principal Bench

On 28.01.2022, the Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur had dismissed a plea challenging the final results of the Civil Judge Cadre of Rajasthan Judicial Services (Preliminary Examination).

The plea was filed by one Ashwini Chaturvedi. She had challenged the administration's decision on the correct choice in relation to question No.80 and its decision to delete question No.81, through which the petitioner missed out clearing the RJS preliminary examination's cut-off only by 1 mark.

A division bench of Justice Akil Kureshi and Justice Madan Gopal Vyas, observed,

"We do not think that the petitioner has made out any case for interference. As is well settled through series of judgments of the Supreme Court, interference by the High Court in specialized fields where recruitment is being made through specialized agencies, should be the minimum."

The court, while relying on Ran Vijay Singh and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh, observed that the correctness of the questions or answers, the role of the High Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would be extremely limited. Unless it is pointed out that either the question or the answer is completely and clearly wrong, the High Court would not overrule a well considered decision of the expert body, added the court.

Also Read: Rajasthan Judicial Services: High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Answer Key Of 2021 Prelims Exam

Case Title: Ved Prakash Chokdayat v. High Court of Rajasthan & Anr