Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from an examination irregularity during the Engineering, Agriculture and Medical Common Entrance Test (EAMCET) held on 22nd May 1996, where the appellant was mistakenly given a 'D' type answer paper instead of the 'C' type. The examination commenced at 2:00 p.m., and the appellant entered the hall at 1:45 p.m., receiving the correct paper only after approximately 10 minutes. Despite answering 170 questions in the remaining time, the appellant contended that the delay caused her significant disadvantage. After the examination, she sought redress through a telegram and subsequent letter, but her grievances were dismissed by the High Court, which found no merit in her petition. The High Court noted a lapse by the invigilator but declined to investigate further, leading to the appellant's appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found that the authorities did not preserve the answer sheets, which were crucial for verifying the appellant's claims. The court noted inconsistencies in the authorities' accounts regarding the timing of the paper exchange and concluded that the appellant likely suffered prejudice due to the irregularity. Consequently, the court directed that the appellant be considered for admission to a medical college based on her performance in the examination, allowing the appeal without costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Examination Irregularity - Prejudice from Wrong Answer Paper - Not applicable - The appellant was given a wrong answer paper during the examination, which was replaced shortly thereafter. The court found that the authorities failed to preserve the answer sheets, which could have clarified the situation, leading to the conclusion that the appellant likely suffered prejudice. Held that the appellant should be considered for admission based on her performance (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant suffered prejudice due to being given the wrong answer paper during the examination.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, directing that the appellant be considered for admission to a medical college based on her performance in the EAMCET, as she secured 94.555% marks. The court noted the failure of the authorities to preserve the answer sheets and the inconsistencies in their accounts.
Law Points
- Examination irregularity
- Writ petition
- Right to fair assessment
- Adverse inference
- Legal proceedings
