Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Examination Authority's Decision, Dismisses Plea for Re-Evaluation

Court Affirms the Predominance of Subject Expert Opinions in Academic Matters

In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice Sandeep Sharma, has dismissed a petition challenging the rejection of a candidate's request for re-evaluation of an answer in a screening test for the post of Constable in the Himachal Pradesh Police Department. The case, titled "Veeku v. State of H.P.," highlights the judicial restraint exercised by the courts in academic matters, emphasizing the reliance on the expertise of subject specialists.

The petitioner, Veeku, sought the court's intervention to re-evaluate Question No. 83 of the examination conducted on June 15, 2025. He argued that the correct answer to the question, according to textbooks approved by the Himachal Pradesh Board and NCERT, should include both options "A" (Dhwani) and "D" (Varn) as correct answers. Additionally, Veeku demanded the revision of his total marks, which would affect his standing in the merit list under the Scheduled Caste category for the post.

However, the court was not swayed by the petitioner's arguments. The judgment underlined that the opinion of subject experts should be presumed correct unless shown to be clearly wrong or contrary to the record. The court referenced several Supreme Court judgments, including "Ran Vijay Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh" and "Bihar Staff Selection Commission v. Arun Kumar," which establish that courts should avoid interference in academic matters unless there is evidence of arbitrariness or material error.

Justice Sharma emphasized that the role of the court is not to substitute its opinion for that of the subject experts. The Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission had previously considered all objections, including the petitioner's, and consulted subject experts who confirmed that the correct answer was option "D."

The court concluded that no illegality or arbitrariness was apparent in the examination authority's decision-making process. It was also noted that questioning the wisdom of subject experts could disrupt the selection process and lead to administrative chaos.

The decision reaffirms the principle that academic matters are best left to the experts and that judicial intervention should be minimal to preserve the integrity and efficiency of the examination process.

Bottom Line:

Examination - Courts should not intervene in re-evaluation or scrutinize the answer sheets of candidates as it is an academic matter best left to subject experts. The opinion of subject experts should be presumed correct unless shown to be clearly wrong or contrary to record.

Statutory provision(s): Article 14, Article 16 of the Constitution of India

Veeku v. State of H.P., (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2818373