The yardstick for judging an examination

Amid challenges to judicial service exams,courts have decided on correctness of questions and answers,though Supreme Court stresses rules cannot be changed after the game. Constitution bench will decide what these rules of the game are

In the decade and a half since the judicial services examination adopted its current format across states,candidates have often gone to courts challenging the objective-type questions in the first round,or the answers provided in keys.

The courts judgments have ranged from appointing panels to assess the correctness of the questions or answer keys to correcting answers it has deemed wrong. This has been despite Supreme Court judgments stressing that the rules of the game are not to be changed after the game has been played.

A three-judge Supreme Court bench has now referred to a constitution bench the decision on what would constitute these rules of the game,and whether or not can these can be changed.

RAJASTHAN FLIP-FLOP

An exam for 114 civil judges in Rajasthan,held in December 2011 and leading to a court case with a final judgment this January,is the latest illustration of the extent to which the sanctity of exams has been challenged,and how far courts have felt it necessary to assess their validity. Exams are held either by high courts or state public service commissions; this one was held by Rajasthans PSC.

Some candidates approached the RPSC over wrong answer keys among the 120 one-mark questions. The RPSC deleted 14 questions and distributed the 120 marks among the remaining 106 apart from changing the options for 11 questions. The initial result on December 6,2011,listed 1,817 successful candidates.

Some candidates,meanwhile,had moved the Rajasthan High Court. They argued that the RPSC had wrongly deleted some right questions,and missed deleting a few wrong ones. The high court appointed an amicus curiae to vet the correctness of the questions in consultation with the RPSC,and make recommendations.

In May 2012,the court ruled that six questions would be deleted,eight questions wrongly deleted would be restored the other six would stay deleted,and the options for six questions would be corrected.

Story continues below this ad

The RPSC issued revised results on May 28,with 1,747 candidates now successful. But 297 candidates formerly declared successful were now ineligible for the main,subjective-type exam. Many of them went to the Supreme Court.

A vacation bench stayed the June 30 mains. Justice H L Gokhale,heading the bench,disapproved of the high courts attempt to re-frame the questions,saying a high court could not substitute its views for those of the Rajasthan PSC.

Meanwhile,amid complaints about the answer key still being wrong,the RPSC constituted an expert committee. The committee found five answers by the amicus curiae incorrect and sought permission to revise the results once again.

On January 16 this year,a bench of Justices S S Nijjar and A R Dave opined tentatively that all candidates declared successful in either round should be allowed to sit for the mains. The bench also said it would be in the interest of the judiciary if the Rajasthan High Court conducts the examination.

Story continues below this ad

On January 30,a different bench,comprising Justices S S Nijjar and M Y Eqbal,passed the final order candidates who had passed in the original preliminary examinations should qualify for the mains. It did not mention those declared successful after the second exercise. The bench refused to entertain requests to quash the entire exam.

The bench directed the RPSC to conduct the mains within two months and declare the result within a month thereafter.

There have been several other instances of the accuracy of exams being taken up by high courts in Delhi,Punjab amp; Haryana,Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh see box.

RULES OF THE GAME

The expression has been used by the Supreme Court in some judgments dealing with the examinations. 8230;Changing the rules of the game after the game was played8230; is clearly impermissible, it ruled in 2008.

Story continues below this ad

Again,in a batch of cases from various states ranging from 1996 to 2010,the Supreme Court ruled, Courts can not take on the role of examiner or the evaluator or that of the selection board to examine discrepancies either in the question papers or the answer sheets8230; Courts are to assume the answer given in the key answer to be correct. Any interference in this regard would tend to make them to take on the role of paper setter,which would be beyond the purview of judicial review.

And in 2002,the Supreme Court had held that the rules of the game,meaning thereby the criteria for selection,cannot be altered by the authorities concerned in the middle or after the process of selection has commenced.

The three-judge benchs referral to the constitution bench on what constitutes the rules of the game comes on a case where the Rajasthan High Court had conducted an examination for 13 translators,with one of the criteria for selection changed after the exam. Justice J Chelameswar ruled that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India to constitute a larger bench for an authoritative pronouncement.

Experts say the question to be examined is at what point an examination once held can be deemed invalid,if at all. Says M N Krishnamani,president of the Supreme Court Bar Association,I feel that if more than 5 per cent of the total questions are wrong,the exam should be held invalid. He called for uniform yardsticks to quash exams due to flawed processes.

Story continues below this ad

Former Delhi High Court judge S N Dhingra,too,said errors in 5 per cent of the questions should lead to quashing. Such flaws must be removed to maintain the sanctity of the exams.

Senior advocate Ranjit Kumar has called for quashing if around 20 per cent questions or answers are wrong. Once an objective-type question paper is scrutinised because of incorrectness,subjectivity comes in,and that should not allowed.

COURTS

AFTER THE EXAM

Delhi HC: A division bench,ruling on a batch of petitions in April 2012, provided correct answers for 26 questions of the 2011 Delhi Judicial Services examination. Out of 200 questions,the court classified the discrepant ones into various categories,and directed the removal of 12,correction of answers for 7 others and fresh evaluation of the answer sheets of around 7,000 candidates. It decided,however,not to disturb the list of 276 candidates already declared successful in the prelims.

Punjab amp; Haryana HC: Exam on September 4,2011,for 80 civil judges. After some candidates challenged the answer key,a division bench requested the Chief Justice to constitute a committee of judges to go into the correctness of the claims,while allowing all petitioners to sit in the mains.

Story continues below this ad

Himachal Pradesh HC: Exam by state PSC in 2005,for 13 civil judge posts. One of the candidates sought revaluation of his answer sheet alleging inconsistencies in two questions. The court directed the PSC to produce his answer sheets,and then to arrange for a special interview for the petitioner since it was of the view that there had been some inconsistency in framing those questions. Later,the Supreme Court set aside the order,noting it is not permissible for the high court to examine the question paper and answer sheets itself.

Madhya Pradesh HC: Preliminary exam for civil judges,May 2012. Some candidates alleged model answers to at least six questions were incorrect. The initial result had already been revised,after cancelling three wrong questions. The court decided on the correctness of the challenged questions and directed re-tabulation of the entire result.