Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who were candidates for the post of Police Sub-Inspector (Driver) in Maharashtra, challenged the selection process conducted by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC). The MPSC had initially published a provisional answer key and invited objections. After considering expert opinions, the Commission revised certain answers and prepared a fresh merit list. The petitioners, who were not selected in the revised list, argued that the revision was arbitrary and that they had a legitimate expectation of being selected based on the initial key. The court examined the facts and found that the MPSC had acted within its powers under the relevant rules. The court noted that the revision was based on expert advice and that no mala fides were alleged. The court also held that the petitioners had no vested right to a particular answer key and that the selection process was fair. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and the interim relief granted earlier was vacated.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Selection Process - Revision of Answer Keys - MPSC revised answer keys for the post of Police Sub-Inspector based on expert opinion, leading to a fresh merit list - Petitioners challenged the revision, but the court held that the Commission acted within its powers and no mala fides were established - The court found no violation of rules or principles of natural justice (Paras 1-23). B) Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Scope of Interference - The court reiterated that in matters of selection, the scope of judicial review is limited to examining whether the process was arbitrary, mala fide, or contrary to statutory rules - Since the MPSC followed a fair procedure and the petitioners had no vested right to a particular answer key, the writ petition was dismissed (Paras 1-23).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) was justified in revising the answer keys and preparing a fresh merit list for the post of Police Sub-Inspector, and whether the petitioners' challenge to the selection process is maintainable.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Administrative Law
- Service Law
- Selection Process
- Merit List
- Answer Key Revision
- Natural Justice
- Writ Jurisdiction
- Judicial Review
