KANPUR UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS versus SAMIR GUPTA AND OTHERS

Citation: [1984] 1 S.C.R. 73 · Decided: 27-09-1983 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 8 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

r 
• 
k.ANPUR UNIVERSITY AND OtHERS 
v. 
SAMIR GUPTA AND OTHERS 
September 27, 1983 
[Y. V. CHANDRACHUD, C. J., R: S. PATHAK 
AND SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, JJ.] 
Entrance Examinations to courses of siudy'-Multiplt Choice Objectivt-
A 
B 
type TeSts-Combined Pre-medical Test for admission to medical collegeS in U.P. 
C 
Whether Correatness of key-answers to questions set in the examintition open to 
challenge ? 
The appellant-University held the "Combined Pre-Medical Test" for 
· admission to the seven medical colleges in U.P. during the year, 1982. The 
pattern of examination adopted was known as·the "Mult_iple' Choice Objective-
type" test according to which a .paper containing 100 'questions with fou.r 
D 
alternative answers for each question was set in each of the four subjects pres-
cribed for the test and the candidates were asked to tick the correct answer 
from out of the four alternatives given. The marking of answer-book Was 
done by a computer into which had be~n fed the key-answers supplied by the 
paper-setters. When the University pubHshed the key-answers along with the 
1 result of the test, the respondents who 'had .appeared in the test and whoSe 
names did not figure in the ljst of successful candidates filed writ petitions 
contending that the key-answers published by the UnivefSity in regard to three 
questions Were wrong, that the answers tic}ced by them in regard to those three 
questions were correct and that if their ans~er-books Were reassessed correctly 
tliey would be entitled to be admitted to the M.B.B.S. course. The High Court 
accepted their cOntention and allowed the petitions. 
; 
. Council for the University contemled that no challenge should be 
allow~d to be made to the correctness of a key-a·ns'wer unless, on the face of 
.it, it is wrong: 
Dismissing the appeals, · 
HELD: Normally, the key~answer furnished by the paJ)er-setter and 
accepted by the University as correct, should 'not be allowed to be challenged. 
the key-answer should be assumed to be correct unless · it is proved to be 
wrong and it should not be held to be wrong by an inferential prqcess of 
reasoning or by a pro~ess of rationalisation but must be'clearly demonstrated 
to be wrong, that is to say, it must be such as no reasonable body of rr.en well-
versed in the particular subject would regard as correct. [81 D, H, 82 A-BJ 
' 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
74 "' 
SUPRllME COURT REPoRTS 
(1984) 1 s.c.it 
In the instant case, the contention ·~r the University is falsified by•a large 
number of acknowledged text-books, which are o.eommcnly read by students in 
U.P. ·. Those text books leave no room for doubt that the answers given by the 
students are correct and· the key-answers are incorrect. stnce the matter is 
beyond the realm of doubt, it would be unfair to penalise the students for not 
gi~ing an answer which accords with the key-answer, that is to saY, With an 
answer which is deffionstrated to be wrong. [82 B-DJ 
The publication of the key-answer has unravelled an unhappy state' of 
affairs· to which tbe University and the State Governn1ent must find a solution. 
The State Government should compile under its own auspices a text book 
which should be prescribed for student desirous of appearing fo~ the Combined 
Pre-inedi~al Test. A systeffi should be devised for moderating the keY-
answers furnished bY the paper-setters. If English-- questions have to be trans-
lated. into Hindi it is not enough to·.,appoint an expert in Hi~di language as a 
translator. The translator 111ust know the~ n1eaning of the scientific tenni-
nology, and the art of translation. In a S)'Stem of "Multiple Choice Objective-
type Test" care must be taken to see that questions having a11 ambiguous 
import-are not set in the papers. Whenever the attention of the University 
is draWn to any defect in a key-anSwer, or any ambiguity in a question set. in' 
the examination, Prompt and 'timely decision must be taken by the University 
to declare that the suspect question will be excluded from the paper and no 
marks.assigned to it. [81 F, 82 E, G-H, 83 ~-BJ 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 4092-4115 
of 1983. 
· 
Appeals by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated 
the 24th February, 1983 of the .Allahabad High Court '(Lucknow 
Bench) in Writ Petition Nos. 4773-74/82, 4827, 5024, 5216, 5314, 
5716-5717, 5724, 5816, 5817, 5818, 5819, 5821, 6029, 6067, 6069, 
6102,.6103, 6389, of 1982 & 9, 14~, 230, 277of1983. 
AND 
Civi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.