Delhi Judicial Service Examination postponed in view of pending Writ Petition

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

5 May 2016 6:46 AM GMT

  • Delhi Judicial Service Examination postponed in view of pending Writ Petition

    Delhi High Court has postponed the Delhi Judicial Service Main Examination (Written), 2015 scheduled to be held on 14th and 15th May, 2016. The notice issued by the High Court regarding the same,states as follows;“In continuation of this Court’s Notice dated 04.03.2016, it is hereby notified that in view of the pendency of WP (C) No. 2104/2016 titled “Manish Gupta vs. Registrar...

    Delhi High Court has postponed the Delhi Judicial Service Main Examination (Written), 2015 scheduled to be held on 14th and 15th May, 2016. The notice issued by the High Court regarding the same,states as follows;

    “In continuation of this Court’s Notice dated 04.03.2016, it is hereby notified that in view of the pendency of WP (C) No. 2104/2016 titled “Manish Gupta vs. Registrar General, Delhi High Court” and WP (C) No. 3453/2016 titled “Sumit Kumar vs. High Court of Delhi and Anr.” before Delhi High Court, the Delhi Judicial Service Main Examination (Written), 2015 scheduled to be held on 14th and 15th May, 2016 has been postponed. The next dates for the examination shall be notified later on”

    The writ petition challenging the Preliminary examination is finally heard on  27. 4.2016 and reserved for orders.

    The Petition filed by unsuccessful candidates, has alleged that the question paper contained ambiguous questions. It has hence demanded that the answer key be quashed and marks be awarded for questions which can have more than one answer. “Petitioner was flabbergasted after looking at the answer keys since it involved lot of ambiguities and many questions which had multiple answers were wrongly marked correct. Some of the keys were demonstrably wrong in the opinion of a reasonable body of persons well-versed in the subject and some keys were incorrect beyond doubt,” the petition reportedly states. It is also pointed out that the High Court had invited objections after releasing the answer key. Acknowledging certain errors, a revised key was issued. This key, he claims, reveals the ambiguity in 13 questions. It further alleged “blatant laxity” in performance of statutory duty, noting that out of these 13 questions, 5 answers were found to be incorrect in the previous answer key.

    Next Story