Calcutta HC Orders LDA Exam Scores Reworked, Giving Credit for Both “8” and “14” on Seven-Sisters Question

In brief

The question

1. Whether the appellant’s challenge to the answer key for Question 70 required the court to determine which of options (B) or (C) was correct.

The court held

The appeal was disposed of by directing the respondents to treat options (B) and (C) as correct answers to Question 70, add the allocated mark, remove any corresponding negative mark, and republish the affected results.

It also directed

Candidates who qualify after recalculation are eligible for the next stage, the written test; the impugned order consequently loses its efficacy.

Pending interim applications were also disposed of.

01Facts

The appellant challenged the dismissal of his writ petition concerning Question 70 in the LDA/24 Examination, Booklet Series B.

¶ 1

The provisional answer key identified option (B), “8 children,” as correct; after considering objections, the recruitment committee changed the answer to option (C), “14 children”.

¶ 1, 5–7

The appellant contended that option (B) was correct and challenged the treatment of his answer and the resulting negative marking.

¶ 7

The appeal also raised a question about applying a new OBC reservation policy during an ongoing selection process.

¶ 2–4

The parties accepted that this issue could be considered by the High Court on its administrative side, and the appellate court did not decide it.

¶ 2–4

The High Court then stated that candidates selecting either option (B) or (C) would be treated as correct; the appellant accepted disposal on that basis.

¶ 11–13

02Issues

i.1. Whether the appellant’s challenge to the answer key for Question 70 required the court to determine which of options (B) or (C) was correct.

¶ 5–10

ii.2. Whether candidates who selected either option (B) or (C) should receive the mark for Question 70, with any negative mark for that answer removed, and have their results reconsidered.

¶ 11–14

iii.3. Whether the application of the new OBC reservation policy to the ongoing selection process should be determined in this appeal.

¶ 2–4

03Law Applied

The court stated that it should not assume the role of an academic expert and that the correctness of an examination answer is ordinarily for the expert body to assess.

¶ 9

No statute or judicial precedent was cited.

The court did not resolve the academic correctness of either answer: it disposed of the appeal on the High Court’s representation that both options would be accepted.

¶ 11–14

04Reasoning

Although the court observed that option (B) appeared correct on the stated family relationship, it did not decide the answer-key dispute on that basis.

¶ 10

Instead, the High Court represented that both options would be accepted, and the appellant agreed to disposal on that basis.

¶ 11–13

Giving effect to that position, the court directed that candidates selecting either option receive the mark and that the negative mark for an incorrect response be removed.

¶ 14

The reservation-policy issue was left for administrative consideration, not judicial determination in the appeal.

¶ 3–4, 14