REET 2021: Rajasthan High Court Finds Discrepancy In Final Answer Key, Directs RBSE To Obtain Fresh Expert Opinion

The written examination of REET-2021 was held on 26.09.2021. The result of the same was published on 02.11.2021 along with the final answer key.

Justice Arun Bhansali, ruled,

"...the petitions to the extent of petitioners, who have raised objection qua Question No.79 in subject Hindi of Series 'J', which is question No.84 in 'K' series, 73 in 'L' series, and 69 in 'M' series, are partly allowed. The respondent-Board is accordingly directed to get a fresh expert opinion by a different committee on the said question and give effect to the opinion of the expert committee qua the petitioners who have raised objections qua said question No.79 (Subject: Hindi) in 'J' series and qua the same question in other series as well."

A batch of writ petitions have been filed by REET 2021 Level–I candidates questioning the validity of the final answer key published by the respondent-RBSE and consequential determination of the marks awarded to them in the examination.

A total of 5 questions have been challenged by the petitioners, which include two questions from the subject Child Development and Pedagogy and one question each from Environmental Studies, Gujarati and Hindi.

In this regard, the court ruled that determination made by the expert committee on Questions No.27 & 28 (Subject: Child Development and Pedagogy), 135 (Subject: Environmental Studies), and 63 (Subject: Gujarati) in 'J' series, do not call for any interference. Insofar as Question No.79 (Subject: Hindi) is concerned, the court observed that the same is apparently incorrect reading of the material relied on and thus, requires reconsideration by the expert committee and consequence has to be provided for the same.

The court examined the disputed questions, final answer key, the material produced by the petitioners and the opinion of the experts.

The court noted that judicial review of the decision of the examining body, be it in the field of education or in the recruitment to public employment, is extremely limited and unless it is pointed out that there is a glaring error or an irrational decision has been rendered, the Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India would not interfere, observed the court.

In this case, the Court noted that even going by the above principle, the determination in the present case appears to be not justified and as such, the same calls for a re-determination on the part of the respondent Board.

The benefit of the revised answer key will be available qua the petitioners who have raised objections qua said question No.79 (Subject: Hindi) in 'J' series and qua the same question in other series as well.

Case Title: Karma Ram v. The Board of Secondary Education, Ajmer, through its Secretary

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 85