Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court dismissed two writ petitions challenging the answer keys for the NEET PG 2016 examination. The petitioners, Dr. Ashish Mishra and Madhur G Maheshwari, sought a declaration that certain questions in the answer keys were incorrect and requested the constitution of a fresh expert committee to re-evaluate the disputed questions. The court, after hearing arguments, held that judicial review of answer keys is limited to cases of patent errors and that the expert committee's opinion is entitled to deference. The petitioners failed to demonstrate any patent error or perversity in the committee's findings. The court noted that the expert committee had already considered the objections and provided reasoned responses. Consequently, both petitions were dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Judicial Review - Answer Key Challenge - Limited Scope - Patent Error - The court held that judicial review of answer keys in competitive examinations is confined to cases where there is a patent error on the face of the record or the answer key is demonstrably wrong. The court cannot substitute its own opinion for that of the expert committee. (Paras 1-36) B) Expert Committee - Deference - Perversity - The opinion of an expert committee constituted to evaluate disputed questions is entitled to great weight and should not be interfered with unless it is shown to be perverse, arbitrary, or mala fide. (Paras 1-36) C) Medical Education - NEET PG 2016 - Answer Key - No Patent Error - The petitioners failed to demonstrate any patent error in the answer keys for Section-A and Section-B (Medicine, Surgery, Pediatrics) of the NEET PG 2016 examination. The expert committee had already considered the objections and provided reasoned responses. (Paras 1-36)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the answer keys for NEET PG 2016 contain patent errors warranting correction by the court, and whether the expert committee's opinion should be re-evaluated.
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Judicial review of answer keys limited to patent errors
- Expert committee opinion entitled to deference
- No interference unless perversity or mala fides shown
