JHABAR SINGH JAT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed this writ petition with the prayer that the respondents be directed to invite objections from the candidates against the answer key of RPMT Examination, 2009. Further, it has been prayed that the respondents be directed to constitute an Expert Committee to consider objections of the petitioners and other candidates of RPMT Examination, 2009. It has also been prayed that the respondents be directed to publish fresh answer key as per the opinion of the Expert Committee and to prepare a fresh merit list in accordance to it.

(2.) The relevant facts relating to the present controversy are that the respondent No.4 had issued an advertisement inviting applications for appearance in the RPMT Examination, 2009, in furtherance of which the petitioners had applied and appeared in the said examination. The result of the RPMT Examination, 2009 was declared by respondent No.4 on 4.6.2009. It was followed by publication of the answer key in the newspaper. The petitioners had noticed that some wrong answers were given in the answer key and no objections were invited by the respondents against the answer key of RPMT Examination, 2009, as had been done by the respondent-University in respect of the examination of the year 2008. Therefore, the students moved an application, under Right to Information Act, before respondent No.2 and prayed for giving the copy of question papers of RPMT Examination, 2009. But the said request was turned down. Then the petitioners alongwith other candidates submitted a representation on 17.6.2009 to respondent No.2 with the request to supply the question papers of RPMT Examination, 2009. It was also requested that an Expert Committee in the matter may be constituted to rectify the mistake committed in the answer key and a fresh answer key may be issued thereafter. The Assistant Registrar of the respondent- University had declined the request made by the petitioners in respect of the demand of question paper of RPMT Examination, 2009. The respondents neither constituted any Expert Committee nor issued the answer key, as requested by the petitioners.

(3.) On 16.7.2009, the first counseling for admission to the Medical College was started and ended on 18.7.2009. Then again the petitioners alongwith other candidates made a representation on 9.7.2009 reiterating the request for making available the question paper and to revise the answer key. Thereafter another representation was submitted on 15.7.2009, but no heed was paid. On 14.8.2009, the information with regard to second round of counseling of RPMT Examination, 2009 was published. It was mentioned that the second counseling shall be conducted from 27.8.2009 to 29.8.2009. When all the representations made by the petitioners were not responded to by the respondent- University then a notice for demand of justice was sent to them on 19.8.2009. But the respondents did not constitute an Expert Committee to redress the grievance of the petitioners in respect of RPMT Examination, 2009.