Rajasthan High Court Directs Formation Of Panel To Examine Issue Of Faulty Answer Keys, Wrong Questions In Public Recruitment Exams
Expressing concern at recurring instances of faulty answer keys and incorrect questions in public recruitment exams, the Rajasthan High Court directed the State to constitute a "High Level Committee of Senior IAS Officers" to examine the issue and formulate an SOP ensuring transparency and accuracy in future recruitment exams.
The court passed the direction, while upholding the right of meritorious candidates who were denied appointment to posts of Teacher Grade III Level II in 2022, based on original answer key which was subsequently revised after a long-drawn litigation. Based on revised answer-key, petitioners secured higher marks than some of the already appointed candidates.
The core question which the court was considering whether petitioners, who on the basis of revised result, had secured more marks than the already selected and appointed candidates, are entitled to appointment to the posts in question and if yes, then in that event, to what treatment, the already selected and appointed candidates are entitled to.
After perusing the record, the bench of Justice Anand Sharma directed the State to assess the number of vacancies and grant appointment to the eligible petitioners subject to availability of vacancies. The court however said that no candidate "already appointed pursuant to the original answer key" shall be terminated solely on account of subsequent revision of the answer key, since they were not at fault.
Before parting, the Court observed that it is a matter of common knowledge that unemployment has assumed alarming proportions in the present era and the level of competition in public recruitments has become extraordinarily intense.
"In such competitive examinations, particularly those based upon objective type multiple-choice questions, every single question assumes great significance, as marks attached even to one question are capable of altering the fate of hundreds of aspiring candidates. Therefore, the degree of caution, fairness, accuracy and vigilance required while framing the question paper and preparing the answer key is extremely high. Recruiting agencies, being instrumentalities of the State, cannot be permitted to deal with such examinations in a casual or negligent manner. They are under a constitutional obligation to ensure that question papers and answer keys are prepared with utmost precision by duly consulting authentic and standard reference books through competent subject experts, so as to eliminate the possibility of any ambiguity or error therein. Recurring instances of faulty answer keys and incorrect questions not only give rise to avoidable litigation but also seriously prejudice the careers of meritorious candidates and shake the confidence of the public in the fairness of the recruitment process.
Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the Chief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, to constitute a High Level Committee of Senior IAS Officers under the Chairmanship of the Secretary, Department of Personnel, for the purpose of examining the issue in depth and formulating an appropriate Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) and other corrective institutional measures to ensure transparency, accountability and accuracy in future recruitment examinations. The said Committee shall also examine the feasibility of initiating disciplinary proceedings against erring officials and experts responsible for preparation of defective question papers or faulty answer keys due to negligence or casual approach".
The court directed that a complaince report be filed within three months.
The Court was hearing a bunch of petitions in relation to recruitment of Grade III teachers that commenced in 2022. Based on the final answer key, the selections were made to the posts in 2023.
However, certain objections were made in relation to the answer key, that finally got resolved in 2025, based on which the answer key was modified. Resultantly, the results were revised, and petitioners' marks became higher than marks of some of the originally appointed candidates. Hence, the petition was filed before the Court seeking appointments.
The court noted that in a large number of recruitments based on objective type exams containing multiple choice questions, grievances are frequently raised by candidates of either incorrectly framed questions or the model answer key prepared by the recruiting agency containing incorrect answers contrary to authentic and standard text books pertaining to the relevant subject.
"Despite submission of objections by the candidates, in many cases such grievances are either not properly examined or are rejected in a mechanical manner, compelling aggrieved candidates to approach this Court seeking constitution of an expert committee for re-examination of disputed questions and answer keys. During pendency of such litigation, appointments are often made on the basis of merit lists prepared through the original answer key. However, upon re-evaluation by expert committees constituted pursuant to orders passed by the writ court, modifications are suggested in respect of certain answers, resulting in revision of the answer key and consequential alteration in the marks secured by the candidates.
In several cases, candidates who were initially denied appointment are thereafter found to have secured higher marks than some of the candidates already appointed on the basis of the original answer key. Denial of appointment to such more meritorious candidates, despite there being no fault attributable to them would be wholly arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Rights of more meritorious candidates cannot be permitted to be defeated on account of a faulty evaluation process attributable solely to the recruiting agency," the court said.
At the same time, it said that it cannot lose sight of the fact that candidates already appointed pursuant to the original select list had no role whatsoever in the process of preparation of the erroneous answer key or the consequential selection process, nor are there any allegations of fraud, concealment or misrepresentation against them.
Therefore, the principles of equity and balancing of competing rights are required to be invoked so as to protect the interests of both sets of candidates, the court said.
The petitions were thus allowed.
Title: Yasmeen Bee & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Ors., and other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 216