JUDGMENT : MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J. 1. Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as “Selecting Body”) invited applications, for appointment as Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade in Government Schools in different subjects, by a notification dated 13.10.2020. Petitioners responded to the said advertisement and appeared in the examination consisting of multiple choice objective questions. Having been declared unsuccessful in the said examination; petitioners have approached this Court. 2. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in these petitions, therefore, both the petitions are clubbed together and are being heard and decided together. However, for the sake of brevity and convenience, facts of WP (SS) No. 839 of 2022 alone are being considered. 3. In Writ Petition (S/S) No. 839 of 2022, petitioners applied for the post of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade (Hindi). The reliefs sought in this writ petition are as follows: (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus declaring the Options given in the revised Answer Key by the Commission (Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition), as correct answer for Question Nos. 14, 24, 30, 74 and 75 of Question Booklet Series-B for the post of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade (Hindi), as incorrect being not support by any authentic document/books. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Uttarakhand Subordinate Service Selection Commission to treat the Options given by the petitioners to Question Nos. 14, 24, 30, 74 and 75 of the Booklet Series-B as a correct Option of the said questions and accordingly award marks to the petitioners for the said questions and consequently revised the total marks allotted to the petitioners in the written examination held of the post of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade (Hindi). (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Commission to include the name of the petitioners in the Provisional Merit List of the post of Assistant Teacher, L.T. Grade (Hindi) after revision of the marks allotted to the petitioners in the written examination. 4. Petitioners in these writ petitions have raised the issue of correctness of answers to Question Nos. 14, 24, 30, 74 and 75 of Question Booklet Series ‘B’, as given in the revised answer key. 5. Petitioners have relied upon certain texts for contending that the answers treated as correct by the Selecting Body are actually incorrect. 4. Petitioners in these writ petitions have raised the issue of correctness of answers to Question Nos. 14, 24, 30, 74 and 75 of Question Booklet Series ‘B’, as given in the revised answer key. 5. Petitioners have relied upon certain texts for contending that the answers treated as correct by the Selecting Body are actually incorrect. The Selecting Body as well as the interveners have also relied upon certain books in support of their contention that the answers given in revised answer key are correct and supported by authentic text. 6. Mr. Pankaj Purohit, learned counsel for the Selecting Body submits that objections received against first answer key were referred to the expert committee and the expert committee, after much deliberations, corrected the answers in respect of few questions. Thus he submits that once the expert committee has taken a decision based on objections, then judicial interference with the view taken by the expert committee would not be proper. 7. It is well settled that High Court, while exercising power of judicial review, cannot assume the role of a Expert and it cannot decide, whether an answer treated as ‘correct’ by subject experts in reply to a multiple choice question, is actually correct or not. In other words, this Court while exercising power of judicial review cannot sit in judgment over the decision taken by Experts. 8. However, in Para 36 of the writ petition [WP (SS) No. 839 of 2022], petitioners have raised a different issue. According to them, meaning to a word given in a particular dictionary cannot be posed as question, that too when the question is from the field of psychology/anthropology. Para 36 of the writ petition is reproduced below: “36. That option B ‘Webster Dictionary’ given by the Commission is a correct answer key for the Question No. 30 of Booklet Series B is incorrect for the reason that except option B all other options in the said question are the name of the persons who have given the definition, whereas option B is only a Dictionary, furthermore, the question itself shows that the candidate has to give option as to who has given the definition of development.” 9. Similar issue is raised in Para 34 of writ petition [WP (SS) No. 845 of 2022], regarding correctness of question no. 15 in Question Booklet Series ‘A’ which reads as under: “34. Similar issue is raised in Para 34 of writ petition [WP (SS) No. 845 of 2022], regarding correctness of question no. 15 in Question Booklet Series ‘A’ which reads as under: “34. That option B ‘Webster Dictionary’ given by the Commission is a correct answer key for the Question No. 15 of Booklet Series A is incorrect for the reason that except option B all other options in the said question are the name of the persons who have given the definition, whereas option B is only a Dictionary, furthermore, the question itself shows that the candidate has to give option as to who has given the definition of development.” 10. In both writ petitions, petitioners have raised issue regarding same question, which is numbered as Question No. 30 in Question Booklet Series-B and Question No. 15 in Question Booklet Series-A. The said question is reproduced below: “30. According to whom, Development is the series of changes which an organism undergoes in passing from an embryonic state to maturity? (A) Hurlock (B) Webster Dictionary (C) Anderson (D) Allport.” 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that question no. 30 in Booklet Series-B contains the following statement; and no candidate can expect that meaning to a word, as given in a dictionary can also be posed as a question, in Competitive Examination: “Development is the series of changes which an organism undergoes in passing from an embryonic state to maturity.” 12. Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that the question asked was who made such statement. He contends that such statement can only be made by an expert in the concerned branch, however, the Selecting Body has treated Option-B as correct answer to the said question. He, thus contends that a dictionary cannot be treated as an expert for making such statement, as is contained in Question No. 30. 13. Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that a dictionary may give meaning to a word or it may define a term of science or art, however, a dictionary cannot express an opinion like an expert on a particular subject. He further contends that meaning given in a dictionary to a particular word cannot be posed as question. Thus, learned counsel for petitioners contends that framing of Question No. 30 in itself is bad, which needs re-consideration. 14. Mr. He further contends that meaning given in a dictionary to a particular word cannot be posed as question. Thus, learned counsel for petitioners contends that framing of Question No. 30 in itself is bad, which needs re-consideration. 14. Mr. Pankaj Purohit, learned counsel for the Selecting Body, however, relied upon a book Authored by Dr. Agyajit Singh titled “Studying Human Psychology”. In the said book, while dealing with concept of development, definition of “development” as given by different Authors, has been referred. At one place, he has also referred to definition of ‘development’ as given in Webster Dictionary. Mr. Pankaj Purohit contends that Question No. 30 is based on the book of Dr. Agyajit Singh. Thus he supports the framing of aforesaid question and the answer to said question in the answer key, by contending that author of said book has also relied upon Webster Dictionary. 15. The contention raised on behalf of Selecting Body cannot be accepted. Question No. 30 is based on a statement. Such a statement can be made only by an expert in related field and no dictionary can be treated as expert in the field of psychology, biology, anthropology etc. A dictionary may define a term so as to make its meaning clear to the reader, however, a candidate appearing in a selection for public employment cannot be expected to memorise definition of various words, as given in different dictionaries. 16. Even otherwise also, definition to an expression given in an English Dictionary can be relevant only in respect of a question pertaining to English language, where various definitions of a particular expression are given and candidates are required to choose the one, which is closest to the definition of that expression. It is also not the case of Selecting Body that candidates, who participated in the selection, were instructed to refer to a particular dictionary. Different dictionaries may define same expression differently. There is no justification offered by the Selecting Body why preference was given to one Dictionary over other internationally acclaimed dictionaries. 17. This Court finds substance in the contention made by learned counsel for petitioners that the book relied by the Selecting Body in support of aforesaid Question cannot be treated as authority on the subject. There is no justification offered by the Selecting Body why preference was given to one Dictionary over other internationally acclaimed dictionaries. 17. This Court finds substance in the contention made by learned counsel for petitioners that the book relied by the Selecting Body in support of aforesaid Question cannot be treated as authority on the subject. Merely because author of said book has referred to definition of ‘Development’ as given in Webster Dictionary will not justify the Selecting Body to pick up the said definition for framing Question No. 30 in Booklet Series-B. 18. In such view of the matter, both the writ petitions are disposed of by directing the Selecting Body to refer Question No. 30 of Question Booklet Series-B (which is numbered as Question No. 15 in Booklet Series-A) to an expert committee consisting of not less than three academicians serving in State/Central Universities in the related branch/subject. Respondent no. 5 shall constitute such committee within two weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The committee shall examine framing of the aforesaid question and also the answer to said question, as given in the revised answer key and submit its report to respondent no. 5 within three weeks of constitution of such committee. Based on the report of the committee, respondent no. 5 shall pass appropriate order within two weeks of receipt of such report.