High Court Refuses To Revise Final Result Of Delhi Judicial Services Exam 2023, Says Interference May Open Floodgates

The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea seeking revision of the final result of Delhi Judicial Services Examination, 2023, observing that judicial interference may open floodgates, leading to cascading consequences and rendering the process unworkable.

A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla said that Courts must exercise restraint and accord due latitude to examining authorities in the regulation of academic and evaluating matters.

The Court said while individual grievances may arise, redressal must be balanced against the larger imperative of preserving fairness, stability, and integrity of the selection system.

The Bench rejected the plea filed by one Prerna Gupta, alleging unlawful interpolation and reduction of her marks at the final stage of evaluation. It was her case that reduction of 20 marks in Paper-I of DJSE (Mains) (Written), 2023 examination was effected after the initial evaluation, resulting in her candidature being declared unsuccessful.

On the other hand, the Delhi High Court administration argued that re-valuation was expressly barred under the DJS Rules and interference would unsettle concluded appointments.

Rejecting her petition, the Bench that the prayer for restoration of the original marks could not be acceded to for two reasons- examiner's discretion in the evaluative process cannot be questioned in absence of any allegations of mala fide, bias, or fraud; and the answers in two questions were admittedly subjective.

It further held that when the Rules prohibit re-evaluation, Courts may interfere only in rare and exceptional cases involving demonstrable material error or manifest arbitrariness.

“We find that the marks initially awarded to individual answers and reflected in the aggregate were subsequently changed, does not, by itself, establish arbitrariness or illegality, particularly where such revisions were made prior to finalization of results and in the absence of any allegation of mala fide or bias. The petitioner's assertion that the reduction was effected only to lower her aggregate remains conjectural and unsupported by material evidence,” the Court said.

It added: “Any direction for re-evaluation would necessarily require extending such exercise to all similarly placed candidates to maintain parity, thereby disturbing concluded selections and disrupting inter se seniority. Such uncertainty in public appointments is antithetical to the principles of fairness, administrative stability and predictability. Judicial interference in such circumstances would open floodgates, leading to cascading consequences and rendering the process unworkable.”

Title: PRERNA GUPTA v. REGISTRAR GENERAL OF DELHI HIGH COURT & ORS

Click here to read order