JUDGMENT : J.B. Pardiwala, J. As common questions of fact and law are involved, in both the above captioned writ petitions, they are disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. The petitioners are students. They cleared their Class XII Examinations in Science subjects. Thereafter, they appeared for Gujarat Common Entrance Test (GUJCET), conducted by the Gujarat Higher Secondary Education Board, respondent No.1 for the year 2011. In the present petitions the challenge is to the inaction on the part of the respondent No.1 in not rectifying the answer key to the extent of considering option (C) also as the correct answer to question No.5 in Booklet “D” of Biology Paper of GUJCET examination held on 7th April 2011. The petitioners have prayed for appropriate directions to the respondents to treat the answer (C) to question No.5 in Booklet 'D' of Biology paper of GUJCET examination held on 7th April 2011 as correct answer. 3. The record reveals that respondent No.1, Gujarat Secondary Higher Education Board has formulated a policy/procedure that the question paper of each subject of Class XII Examination has to be in four different sets. The four sets of paper are numbered/labelled as Booklet No.A, Booklet No.B, Booklet No.C and Booklet No.D. The questions contained in each booklet are same to those contained in other booklets, but are arranged in different sequence in order to discourage and counter cases of copying. Therefore, each subject has four booklets of Question Papers. GUJECT Class XII Question Paper contains multiple choice questions. For each question four different options are indicated and the students appearing in the examinations are supposed to mark the correct option in their Answer Sheet. The Answer Sheets are evaluated by an optical machine controlled by a computer, which reads the Answer Sheets and determines the correctness of the answer on the basis of the answer key, in the form of data input fed into the computer. For every correct answer the student is given the marks corresponding to the question. But for every incorrect answer, negative marking of 25% of marks is given. 4. In the question paper for the subject of Biology, question No.5 was as under:- “5. What is the name of complex formed at the time of action of 'T' Cells? (a) HLA (b) STD Antigen complex (c) HLA Antigen complex (d) MHC Antigen Complex” 5. But for every incorrect answer, negative marking of 25% of marks is given. 4. In the question paper for the subject of Biology, question No.5 was as under:- “5. What is the name of complex formed at the time of action of 'T' Cells? (a) HLA (b) STD Antigen complex (c) HLA Antigen complex (d) MHC Antigen Complex” 5. Subsequent to conducting the GUJCET Class XII examination, respondent No.1, as per its usual practise, published the Answer Key to the Question Papers on its website www.gseb.org. The answer given for Biology paper was also published on the website. The petitioners, on going through the answer key, were surprised to note that in the Answer Key for Booklet No.D the correct answer for question No.5 was stated to be option (d) i.e. MHC Antigen Complex and not option (c) i.e. HLA Antigen Complex. 6. It appears to be the case of the petitioners that in the course of their studies they came to understand that HLA Antigen Complex is formed at the time of action of “T” Cells. The problem cropped up at this stage. According to the petitioners i.e. the students both the answers viz. option (c) and option (d) are the correct answers because, according to them MHC Antigen Complex and HLA Antigen Complex are synonymous as per the standard book of Pathology. 7. It appears that in this regard a representation was also preferred with respondent No.1. However, according to the petitioners, respondent No.1 failed to look into the problem. 8. It is at this stage that the petitioners came before this Court with these two writ petitions. 9. On 10th May 2011, this Court passed the following order:- “State Government is directed to come out with an answer on question No.5 in the Question Paper [Eng. Medium] Booklet “D” of Biology Paper through the Head of the Department on the subject concerned and submit report before this Court. Head of the Department of the concerned Govt. Medical College shall submit report as to which is or are correct answers of question No.5. Let a copy of this order be handed over to learned Government Pleader who, along with an affidavit, will submit such report. Post the matter on 13th June, 2011 within five cases. Head of the Department of the concerned Govt. Medical College shall submit report as to which is or are correct answers of question No.5. Let a copy of this order be handed over to learned Government Pleader who, along with an affidavit, will submit such report. Post the matter on 13th June, 2011 within five cases. In the meantime, if any result is published, selection is made, allocation of medical colleges and subjects are made on the basis of the result, it shall be subject to the decision of the case.” 10. We have heard learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Sudhir Nanavati appearing with learned advocate, Ms. Anuja S. Nanavati and learned advocate Mr. P.J. Kanabar for the petitioners and learned advocate Mr A.D. Oza appearing for the Gujarat Secondary Education Board and learned Government Pleader, Mr. P.K. Jani appearing for the State. 11. Learned counsels for the petitioners submitted that if any person, who is knowledgeable in the field of medicine, goes through the question paper and looks at the same, both the options (c) HLA Antigen Complex and (d) MHC Antigen Complex are correct. However, in the answer key prepared by the respondents, answer at option (d) MHC Antigen Complex has been shown as correct answer. The effect would be that those who have also given answer as option (c) HLA Antigen Complex, they will not only be deprived of one mark, but there will be negative mark and thereby they will lose 0.25 mark totalling to 1.25 marks and their competitive marks will make huge difference in the matter of competitive examination for admission into Medical Colleges and more particularly in private and Government medical colleges. It is further submitted that in the Gujarati medium Text Book of Biology at page no.152 the diagram for the activation and kinds of 'T' cells is given and explained in Gujarati. However, in the said diagram the complex formed at the time of action of 'T' cells is mentioned as MHC Antigen Complex. Whereas, as stated above, the English medium Biology Text Book does not mention words 'MHC Antigen' in diagram No.26.3 but only refers to the word 'Complex'. It is further submitted that the diagram given in the English and Gujarati medium is one and the same. 12. Whereas, as stated above, the English medium Biology Text Book does not mention words 'MHC Antigen' in diagram No.26.3 but only refers to the word 'Complex'. It is further submitted that the diagram given in the English and Gujarati medium is one and the same. 12. It has been further submitted that answer (c) HLA Antigen Complex and (d) MHC Antigen Complex are both correct answers to the question because, MHC and HLA Antigen Complex are synonymous as per the standard book of Pathology. It has been further submitted that MHC Antigen Complex is also known as HLA Antigen Complex. Referring to the book of 'Robins Basic Pathology', 7th Edition learned counsels have tried to justify the contention as canvassed. The last contention is that HLA Antigen Complex and MHC Antigen Complex are names of complex, formed at the time of action of 'T' Cells. The contention is that both the answers are correct answers and therefore option (c) should also be considered as the correct answer. 13. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the authorities have looked into this issue in detail and after consulting experts on the subject of Biology, they are of the firm view that the correct answer is option (d) i.e., MHC Antigen Complex. They have submitted that this Court, in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, may not go into these issues as they may be left for the experts in the filed to be considered appropriately. They submitted that the petitions deserve to be rejected and no relief can be granted in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 14. We have given our anxious thoughts and consideration to all the relevant aspects of the matter. We have tried our best to consider the problem as it relates to students and considering the policy of negative marking, we have tried to look into the matter very closely. It is true that the issue is very complex and vexed. This Court has no expertise in the field and subject of Biology. Keeping this in mind, we had directed the State Government to come out with an answer on question No.5 through the Head of the Department on the subject concerned and submit report before this Court. 15. It is true that the issue is very complex and vexed. This Court has no expertise in the field and subject of Biology. Keeping this in mind, we had directed the State Government to come out with an answer on question No.5 through the Head of the Department on the subject concerned and submit report before this Court. 15. Normally courts will be slow to enter into a controversy which relates to examinations or tests held for admitting students to specialised course. In the matter of examination, the University authorities must be trusted to hold the examinations in a fair and proper manner and interference by the court must be in the rarest of rare cases where the court is satisfied that the examination has been held in such a manner that it has resulted in arbitrary results so that the examination or the test held and the result declared has not resulted in the test of merit but has left much to the luck or chance of the candidates concerned. There are, however, exceptions to this rule and in exceptional circumstances courts have interfered to grant relief to meritorious candidates whose merit has been ignored because of improper setting of papers or incorrect answers declared in the key-answer. We may refer to two decisions of the Supreme Court of India on this question. In the case reported in AIR 1983 SC 1230 Kanpur University v. Samir Gupta, the question that arose for determination has been succinctly posed in the first part of the judgment of the learned Chief Justice as follows :- "If a paper setter commits an error while indicating the correct answer to a question set by Him, can the students who answered that question correctly be failed for the reason that though their answer is correct, it does not tally with the answer sent by the paper setter to the University as the correct answer?" 16. While considering the question, it was observed that none can accuse the teacher of not knowing the correct answer to the question set by him. But occasionally not enough care is taken by the teachers to set questions which are free from ambiguity and to supply key answers which are correct beyond reasonable controversy. The court then considered the questions and the suggested answers and came to the conclusion that some of the answers given were demonstrably wrong. But occasionally not enough care is taken by the teachers to set questions which are free from ambiguity and to supply key answers which are correct beyond reasonable controversy. The court then considered the questions and the suggested answers and came to the conclusion that some of the answers given were demonstrably wrong. The Court observed that the key answer should be deemed to be correct unless it is proved to be wrong and that it should not be held to be wrong by a process of reasoning or by a process of nationalisation. It must be clearly remonstrated to be wrong, that is to say, it must be such as no reasonable body of men well versed in the particular subject would regard as correct. If there was a case of doubt, one would unquestionably prefer the key answer. But if the matter is beyond the realm of doubt it would be unfair to penalise the students for not giving an answer which accords with the key answer, that is to say, with an answer which is demonstrated to be wrong. 17. Having found that some of the answers were demonstrably incorrect, the court considered the question as to what relief could be granted to the concerned candidates. The High Court in that case had found that the respondents had not been awarded marks for the questions correctly answered by them though those answers were not in accord with the answers given by the paper setter in the key answer which were demonstrated to be wrong. The Supreme Court directed that they should be granted those marks and the answer books reassessed. It was not disputed in that case that if the answer books were reassessed the respondents would be entitled to be admitted to the M.B.B.S. course. In that view of the matter, the Supreme Court confirmed the directions given by the High Court in regard to the reassessment of the particular question and the admission of the respondents to the M.B.B.S. course. 18. Similar situation arose in the case reported in AIR 1984 SC 1402 , Abhijit Sen v. State of U.P. This was also a case where the key answer to one of the questions was demonstrated to be wrong. 18. Similar situation arose in the case reported in AIR 1984 SC 1402 , Abhijit Sen v. State of U.P. This was also a case where the key answer to one of the questions was demonstrated to be wrong. The court after noticing the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kanpur University case (supra) observed as follows :- "Suffice it to say that this Court has expressed therein a clear and categorical view that it the ''key answer' (i.e. the answer which the paper-setter has supplied to the University as the correct answer and which has been fed into the computer) is shown to be demonstrably wrong, that is to say, such as no reasonable body of men well versed in the particular subject would regard it as correct and if the answer given by a student is correct if regard be had to acknowledged text-books or books which the students were expected to read and consult before appearing for the test it would be unfair to penalise the student for not giving an answer which accords with the 'key-answer' that is to say with an answer which is demonstrated to be wrong." After applying these principles, the court while considering the question as to the relief to be granted held that in a situation where both the answers namely one given by the candidate concerned as well as the key-answer supplied by the paper setter were found to be wrong with reference to the correct answer as determined by the court, no relief could be granted to the concerned candidate. Applying that principle one of the appellants before the Supreme Court was denied any relief because even though the answer in the key-answer supplied by the paper setter was found to be wrong, since the answer given by the appellant was also wrong. He, therefore, could not get any relief. Another student, however, who had given the correct answer which was not in accord with the answer given in the key-answer, was granted relief because the key answer was found to be demonstrably in-correct. 19. He, therefore, could not get any relief. Another student, however, who had given the correct answer which was not in accord with the answer given in the key-answer, was granted relief because the key answer was found to be demonstrably in-correct. 19. The principle that emerges from these two decisions is that if the key answer is shown to be demonstrably wrong, and the answer given by the student concerned is correct, the student concerned should not be penalised for not giving an answer which accords with the key-answer, that is to say, with an answer which is demonstrated to be wrong. 20. In response to the order, which we had passed on 10th May 2011, respondent No.2 sought an expert opinion from Dr M.M. Vegad, Professor and Head of Department of Microbiology, BJ Medical College, Ahmedabad. An affidavit has been filed by one Lalit T. Vyas, Under Secretary, Education Department, Government of Gujarat annexing the opinion of Dr M.M. Vegad, Professor and Head of the Department of Microbiology. The report reads as under:- “The correct answer of question no.5 of question paper (English medium) Booklet 'D' of Biology paper in GUJCET is Answer - (D) MHC antigen complex Explanation: Full form of MHC is Major Histocompatibility Complex. In Gujarati medium Biology textbook, page no.152 figure no.26.3 T shows MHC antigen complex word. In English medium Biology text book, page no.152 figure no.26.3 T shows only complex word.” 21. An affidavit-in-reply has also been filed by respondent No.1 i.e. Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board through its Secretary. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit-in reply are reproduced herein below:- “4. At the outset, I say and submit that as per the direction issued by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 10.5.2011 in the captioned petition, the Principal Secretary (Education) Mr R.P. Gupta requested the Dean of B.J. Medical College (Government) vide letter dated 20.4.2011 in fact 20.5.2011 to submit the report in connection with the correct answer of Question No.5 of Biology paper (Booklet-D) of GUJCET. Pursuant to the said letter, Chairman and Principal Secretary (Education) received a report dated 23.5.2011 of Dr Bharat J Shah, Dean BJ Medical College and Dr M.M. Vegad, HOD and Professor Microbiology of the said Medical College, wherein it has been clarified that the answer (D) MHC Antigen Complex is the correct answer. Pursuant to the said letter, Chairman and Principal Secretary (Education) received a report dated 23.5.2011 of Dr Bharat J Shah, Dean BJ Medical College and Dr M.M. Vegad, HOD and Professor Microbiology of the said Medical College, wherein it has been clarified that the answer (D) MHC Antigen Complex is the correct answer. The said report was received by the Board from the Principal Secretary. A copy of said report is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-I. 5. I further say and submit that the GUJCET was conducted on 7.4.2011 and for the subject of Biology, the Board has received 3 representations and pursuant to that the Board decided to refer the matter to the expert committee so that the genuine students may not have to suffer. The said committee comprises of Five Senior Higher Secondary Teachers having teaching experience of 25 to 30 years namely: 1. Smt. Vasundhara Vijay Raval, Msc., M.Ed 2. Shri Vasantkumar P. Vyas, M.Sc., M.Ed. 3. Bhartiben H. Bhatt, M.Sc., M.Ed., M.Phil 4. Dr Parul Maganbhai Patel, M.Sc., B.Ed., Ph.D 5. Smt. Kala Vaishnav, M.Sc., DHC I say that the aforesaid committee met on 6.5.2011 and after examining the syllabus and the material with respect to the subject matter, the committee unanimously opined that answer (D) MHC antigen complex is the correct answer. The Committee in furtherance to their opinion clarified that at the time of action of 'T' Cells only MHC antigen complex is formed. HLA antigen complex is with reference to histocompatibility only according to text book page no.157. I further say that in view of the above opinion of the expert committee the Board has considered answer (D) to be the only correct answer. I say that if the contention of the petitioners is taken into consideration than genuine students are likely to suffer in terms of merits. I say that after the opinion of the expert committee once again the answer key was placed on the website of the Board on 6.5.2011 and it appears that the present petition is preferred thereafter. 6. I say that if the contention of the petitioners is taken into consideration than genuine students are likely to suffer in terms of merits. I say that after the opinion of the expert committee once again the answer key was placed on the website of the Board on 6.5.2011 and it appears that the present petition is preferred thereafter. 6. With reference to para 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the petition, I say and submit that the contentions raised therein have no substance of whatsoever nature and the same are hereby denied which are not in consonance with the syllabus, key answer and the policy of the GUJCET because any reference made by the author of any books of Pathology have no relevance for the subject matter. It is not correct to say that MHC antigen complex is also known as HLA antigen complex. I deny that answer (c) and answer (d) i.e. HLA Antigen Complex and MHC Antigen Complex are both the correct answer to the question. In view of aforesaid I say and submit that the petitioner is not entitled for any reliefs as prayed for in the petition and the petition deserves to be dismissed with cost. I further say and submit that the experts have unanimously opined that the answer (D) is the only correct answer to the question and therefore also, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to upheld the said opinion in the interest and administration of justice.” It is evident from paragraph 5 of the affidavit-in-reply that since respondent No.1 i.e. Board received representations from the students they decided to refer the matter to the Expert Committee so that the students may not have to pay a very heavy price so far as their academic career is concerned. The Expert Committee of five senior Higher Secondary Teachers also came to the conclusion that at the time of action of 'T' Cells only MHC antigen complex is formed. It is further opined that HLA antigen complex is only with reference to only histocompatibility. 22. After going through the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Secondary Education Board and since it came to our notice that Board has formed a Committee comprising of Teachers/Experts in the subject of Biology, we thought fit to pass the following order on 13th June 2011, which reads as under:- “An affidavit has been filed by the respondents. 22. After going through the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Secondary Education Board and since it came to our notice that Board has formed a Committee comprising of Teachers/Experts in the subject of Biology, we thought fit to pass the following order on 13th June 2011, which reads as under:- “An affidavit has been filed by the respondents. It will be desirable if Dr Parul Maganbhai Patel or any of the senior most teachers whose names have been given in para 5 of the reply affidavit filed by the Board or Dr. M.M. Vegad, HOD & Professor Microbiology, BJ Medical College, Ahmedabad remains present on the next date along with the reference book in support of their stand.” 23. On 15th June 2011, Dr M.M. Vegad, HOD & Professor in Microbiology, BJ Medical College, Ahmedabad and Dr. Parul Maganbhai Patel remained present with reference books in support of their stand. After exhaustive deliberations on this issue, we can summarise their opinion as under:- “1. MHC gene complex are present on chromosome No.6. They produce two distinct groups of molecules. They are HLA complex and non-HLA complex i.e. HLA Complex and non-HLA Complex together makes MHC complex. From that it is very clear that HLA Complex is a part of MHC complex but it cannot be called MHC complex in whole or in total. 2. Understanding of the role of MHC complex in immune responses and in pathogenesis of disease require definition of polymorphism in HLA region (Class I and Class II) and non-HLA region or Class III region. (Chapter No.41 : PP 949 - Ref: Mentioned here). The Class I and Class II groups are involved in transcription of HLA Complex i.e. these genes of Class I and Class II encodes HLA I and HLA II complex molecules. Class I includes HLA-A HLA-B and HLA=C and Class-II includes HLA-DR, HLA-DQ and HLA-DP. The third group of genes for MHC is located in between Class I and Class II regions, and they encodes molecules of Class III which are non-HLA Complex. Tumor Necrosis factor is one of them. Hence, it is very clear from above discussion, that MHC complex include both HLA (I and II) and non HLA Complex. Therefore, Option (C) HLA Antigen Complex is not the correct answer and option (D) MHC Antigen Complex is the correct answer. Tumor Necrosis factor is one of them. Hence, it is very clear from above discussion, that MHC complex include both HLA (I and II) and non HLA Complex. Therefore, Option (C) HLA Antigen Complex is not the correct answer and option (D) MHC Antigen Complex is the correct answer. Reference: Clinical Diagnosis and Management by Laboratory Manual (Twentieth Edition) - Bt John Bernard Henry, MD (Chapter No.40- - page No.927 and Chapter No.41, Page No.949, Paragraph No.1, Page No.931) Conclusion: From the above, it is clear that HLA complex is the part of MHC complex, but it cannot be called MHC complex in whole or in total.” 24. Having considered the matter threadbare in the interests of the students more particularly, after taking the opinion of the experts, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the contention of the learned counsel that option (c) and option (d) both are correct answers. The experts on the subject have formulated an opinion that the correct answer is option (d) and not option (c). It is true that there appears to be some discrepancy in the text books more particularly in Gujarati and English, but only on account of some discrepancy in the text books we cannot come to the conclusion that both the options are the correct answers. The opinion of HOD and Professor, Microbiology, BJ Medical College and Five Experienced Teachers in the subject of Biology is the opinion of the experts in the field. The opinion as expressed by the experts on the subject cannot be substituted by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution without any contrary opinion produced by the petitioners. This Court cannot sit over the opinion of the expert body without proper material. Hence, we are of the view that in the absence of conclusive and convincing material, it is not proper for this Court to go against the opinion expressed by the experts in the subject of Biology. 25. The law in this regard is very well settled. It is now well settled by various decisions of the Supreme Court that the findings of expert bodies in technical and scientific matters would not ordinarily be interfered with by courts in the exercise of their power under Article 226 of the Constitution or by the Supreme Court under Article 136 or 32 of the Constitution. It is now well settled by various decisions of the Supreme Court that the findings of expert bodies in technical and scientific matters would not ordinarily be interfered with by courts in the exercise of their power under Article 226 of the Constitution or by the Supreme Court under Article 136 or 32 of the Constitution. For this proposition, reliance can be placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case Systopic Laboratories (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Dr. Prem Gupta & Ors. (1994) Suppl.(1) SCC 160. Paragraphs 19 and 20 of this decision clearly give the answer on the question whether the findings of expert body in technical and scientific matters can be interfered with by the Court either under Article 226 or under Article 32 or 136 of the Constitution. Paragraphs 19 and 20 of the said decision read as under:- “19. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Solicitor General in this regard, we must express our inability to make an assessment about the relative merits of the various studies and reports which have been placed before us. Such an evaluation is required to be done by the Central Government while exercising its powers under section 26-A of the Act on the basis of expert advice and the Act makes provision for obtaining such advice through the Board and the DCC. “20. The learned counsel for the petitioners have urged that these studies and reports had been submitted on behalf of the petitioners and other manufacturers before the Sub-Committee of the DCC as well as the Experts Committee but there has been no proper consideration of the same by the experts as well as the DCC and the Board. In this context, it has been submitted that no medical expert in the field of clinical medicine in the treatment of asthma was associated in the committees and such experts alone could make a proper evaluation of the said studies. We find no substance in this contention. We have pursued the minutes of the meetings of the Board, the Sub- Committee of the DCC as well as the Experts Committee. We find no substance in this contention. We have pursued the minutes of the meetings of the Board, the Sub- Committee of the DCC as well as the Experts Committee. The minutes show that the material that was submitted on behalf of the manufacturers of the drugs in question was examined by the members and it is not possible to hold that there has been no proper consideration of the said by the Experts Committee or the Sub-Committee of the DCC. The complaint that experts in clinical medicine were not associated with the Committee does not appear to be justified. The minutes of the meetings of the experts to consider the views of the affected manufacturers, who represented against the proposed withdrawal of certain formulations moving in the market, which were held on September 8, 1987, October 16/17, 1987 and January 15/16, 1989 show that among the members were included Dr. O.D. Gulati, Dean,CAM Medical College, Karansad and Dr.J.P. Wali, Assistant Professor of Medicine, AIIMS, New Delhi, Dr. M. Durairaj Consultant, Cardiologist, Director of Cardiology, Poona Hospital and Research Centre, Pune was also member of the Sub-Committee and had attended the meeting held on January 15/16, 1988. It cannot, therefore, be said that the medical experts in clinical medicine were not associated in the Experts Committee for evaluation of the material that was furnished by the manufacturers." 26. The role of statutory expert bodies on education and role of Courts are well defined by a simple rule. If it is a question of educational policy or an issue involving academic matter, the Courts keep their hands off. If any provision of law has to be interpreted, applied or enforced, with reference to or connection with education, courts will step in. In Dr J.P. Kulshreshtha v. Chancellor, Allahabad University, reported in (1980) 3 SCC 418 , the Supreme Court observed : “Judges must not rush in where even educationists fear to tread.. While there is no absolute bar, it is a rule of prudence that courts should hesitate to dislodge decisions of academic bodies.” 27. In Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth, reported in (1984) 4 SCC 27 the Supreme Court has reiterated:- “.... While there is no absolute bar, it is a rule of prudence that courts should hesitate to dislodge decisions of academic bodies.” 27. In Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth, reported in (1984) 4 SCC 27 the Supreme Court has reiterated:- “.... the Court should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich experience of actual day-today working of educational institutions and the departments controlling them.” In the above view of the matter, the petitioners are not entitled to any reliefs from this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petitions being without any merit, are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. As the main petitions have been ordered to be dismissed, no orders are required to be passed on Civil Application No.6223 of 2011 in Special Civil Application No.6728 of 2011 also stands disposed of. Petitions dismissed.