Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by students who appeared for the Maharashtra Common Entrance Test (MHT-CET) 2019 for admission to professional courses like engineering and pharmacy. The petitioners challenged the answer keys published by the Competent Authority, alleging that several questions had incorrect or ambiguous answers, which adversely affected their scores and merit rankings. They sought re-evaluation of those questions and revision of the merit lists. The court examined the specific questions in dispute, including those from Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics, and found that some answers were indeed erroneous or had multiple correct options. The court held that the examination process must be fair and transparent under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, and that the authority cannot ignore errors in the answer keys. The court directed the respondents to re-evaluate the affected questions, revise the scores accordingly, and publish fresh merit lists. The judgment emphasizes the importance of accuracy in public examinations and the duty of the state to ensure a level playing field for all candidates.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Education - Fair Examination Process - Articles 14, 21 Constitution of India - Petitioners challenged discrepancies in MHT-CET 2019 answer keys and evaluation - Court held that the examination process must be fair, transparent, and non-arbitrary, and any errors in answer keys affecting merit must be rectified - Directed re-evaluation of certain questions and issuance of revised merit lists (Paras 1-54). B) Education Law - Common Entrance Test - Answer Key Discrepancies - Maharashtra Common Entrance Test (MHT-CET) 2019 - Petitioners alleged that the answer keys published by the Competent Authority contained errors in multiple questions - Court examined the challenged questions and found that some answers were incorrect or ambiguous - Held that the authority must correct the errors and re-evaluate the affected candidates' scores (Paras 20-45). C) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Legitimate Expectation - Articles 14, 21 Constitution of India - Petitioners had a legitimate expectation that the examination would be conducted fairly and that the answer keys would be accurate - Court held that the failure to correct known errors violates principles of natural justice and fairness - Directed the respondents to take corrective measures (Paras 46-54).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the discrepancies in the answer keys and evaluation process of MHT-CET 2019 violate the rights of the petitioners under Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and whether the court can direct re-evaluation and revision of merit lists.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petitions and directed the respondents to re-evaluate the disputed questions, correct the answer keys, revise the scores of affected candidates, and publish fresh merit lists for admission to professional courses.
Law Points
- Interpretation of statutes
- Natural justice
- Fairness in examination process
- Power of court to interfere in academic matters
- Doctrine of legitimate expectation
