ORDER : The petitioners, 15 in number, filed the present Writ Petition, seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent State Level Police Recruitment Board in not considering the objections of the petitioners pertaining to question No.62 in Paper-I (Set-A) and questions Nos.7, 62, 46, 96, 31, 55, 17 in Paper-II (Set-A) and disqualifying the petitioners for Physical Measurement Test as illegal and arbitrary; consequently, direct the 1st respondent Board to revaluate the answer sheets of the Preliminary Written Test by considering the objections of the petitioners pertaining to question No.62 in Paper-I (Set-A) and question Nos.7, 62,46, 96, 31, 55, 17 in Paper-II (Set-A) and award marks to the petitioners accordingly or delete all such questions and revise the list of candidates to be selected for the physical Measurements Test and consider the case of the petitioners for Physical Measurements Test as per the revised merit. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is [i] That the 1st respondent, State Level Police Recruitment Board (hereinafter referred as the Board) had issued recruitment notification vide Rc.No.163/SLPRB/Rect.1/2022, Dt.28.11.2022 inviting applications for the posts of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Sub Inspectors of Police (Civil) (Men & Women) in the Police Department and also for the posts of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Reserve Sub Inspectors of Police (APSP) (Men) in Police Department. A total number of 411 posts were notified in the Recruitment Notification of which 315 posts were notified for SCT SIs and 96 posts were notified for SCT RSIs. The minimum educational qualification for both the posts is a Bachelor's Degree and if the candidate is belonging to SC and ST, the minimum educational qualification is Intermediate with certain age restrictions. All the petitioners are fully eligible and qualified for both the posts and have applied to the Recruitment Notification. [ii] The procedure or scheme for selection is in 4 stages. 1) Preliminary Written Examination (objective type), 2) Physical Measurements Test, 3) Physical Efficiency Test and 4) Final Written Examination. Final selection will be made as per the merit secured by the candidates in Papers-III and IV. The candidates who were qualified in the Preliminary Examination will only be called for the Stage-II i.e., Physical Measurements Test. 1) Preliminary Written Examination (objective type), 2) Physical Measurements Test, 3) Physical Efficiency Test and 4) Final Written Examination. Final selection will be made as per the merit secured by the candidates in Papers-III and IV. The candidates who were qualified in the Preliminary Examination will only be called for the Stage-II i.e., Physical Measurements Test. The Preliminary Written Test consists of two papers, i.e., 1) Arithmetic (SSC standard) and Test of Reasoning / Mental Ability and 2) General Studies (Degree standard). The minimum qualifying marks to be secured by the candidates in the Preliminary Written Test in both the papers is 40% for OCs, 35% for BCs and 30% for SCS / STS / Ex-servicemen. If a candidate fails to secure minimum qualifying marks in one paper, he / she will be disqualified. [iii] The Preliminary examination was conducted on 19.02.2023 in the Forenoon and Afternoon sessions. In order to conduct the examination with better confidentiality, the Board prepares question papers in (4) sets i.e., Set-A, Set-B, Set-C and Set-D. Questions are common in all the 4 sets and only the serial number of the questions will change. All the petitioners have appeared in their respective sets of question papers. The 1st respondent Board has released the Preliminary Answer Key for the Preliminary Written Test on 20.02.2023 calling for objections from the candidates on the Preliminary Key to be submitted to the e-mail ID of the Board on or before 23.02.2023. Petitioners submitted their objections to the questions in their respective set of question papers they appeared. All the questions they objected are same but the question numbers in the set of question paper in which they appeared are different. All the petitioners have submitted their objections to the Preliminary Key stating that the answers are wrong, the questions are ambiguous and there are questions without answers. Thereafter, a final key was issued by the Board on 28.02.2023. On 28.02.2023, the day on which the Final Key was published, the 1st respondent Board has announced the results of Preliminary Written Test selecting 57,923 candidates out of 1,51,288 candidates who appeared in the examination. Unfortunately, the petitioners were not selected for Stage-II and they were disqualified in a narrow margin of 1 to 4 marks. On 28.02.2023, the day on which the Final Key was published, the 1st respondent Board has announced the results of Preliminary Written Test selecting 57,923 candidates out of 1,51,288 candidates who appeared in the examination. Unfortunately, the petitioners were not selected for Stage-II and they were disqualified in a narrow margin of 1 to 4 marks. Assailing the action of the respondents in not considering the objections of the petitioners and finalizing the Final Key and announcing the results is impugned in this Writ Petition. [iv] The disputed questions and answers in both the Initial Key and Final Key and also the relevant material are submitted as follows :- NAME OF THE EXAMINATION Paper-I, Set-A: Arithmetic and Test of Reasoning/Mental Ability S. No. Q. No. Question Reference & explanation 1. 62 Answer as per Initial Key: 4 Answer as per Final Key : 4 DR. R.S. AGARWAL, S. CHAND PUBLICATIONS, PAGE NO:235, IN PROBLEM SOLVING OF NON VERBAL REASONING QUESTION NO:86, ANSWER & EXPLANATION IS IN PAGE NO: 272 Objection OPTION 3 2. 7 According to molecular orbital theory the correct bond order values of species NO+,O2-, CO+? (1) 3.0, 2.5, 1.5 (2) 1.5, 3.0, 2.5 (3) 2.5, 1.5, 3.0 (4) 3.0, 1.5, 2.5 Answer as per Initial Key: 4 Answer as per Final Key : 4 Text Book for A.P Intermediate First year chemistry (Board of Intermediate Education, Govt. of A.P). Page No:105, Chapter-3, Chemical Bonding and Molecular Structure. Formula for Calculating Bond Order is Mentioned clearly. Objection: Here the correct answer of CO+ IS 3.5, But this option is not at all mentioned in the given 4 options of exam paper. 3. 62 The State producing largest sealing wax in India? (1) Bihar (2) Andhra Pradesh (3) Uttar Pradesh (4) Haryana Answer as per Initial Key: 1 Answer as per Final Key : 1 RTI applied and received answer as JHARKHAND from ICAR officials Govt. of India. RTI REGN NO:IINRG/R/E/23/ 00002. Objection: Actually the correct answer of this question is Jharkhand, but the option is not at all mentioned in the given 4 options of exam paper. 4. 46 Which of the following place yielded Archaeological evidence of pit dwellings? Answer as per Initial Key: 3 Answer as per Final Key : 3 Ancient India, A History Text Book for Class XI, NCERT BOOK, Page No.38 of Chapter 5 – The Stone Age: The Early Man. 4. 46 Which of the following place yielded Archaeological evidence of pit dwellings? Answer as per Initial Key: 3 Answer as per Final Key : 3 Ancient India, A History Text Book for Class XI, NCERT BOOK, Page No.38 of Chapter 5 – The Stone Age: The Early Man. The answer BURZAHOM, which is pit dwelling. Objection: Actually the Correct Answer for this Question is BURZAHOM, but this option is not at all mentioned in the 4 given options of exam paper. Here GUFKRAL is a cave dwelling not a pit dwelling. 5. 96 Based on School Education Quality Index 2021, The Best and Worst performing Indian States are? (1) Tamilnadu, Jharkhand (2) Kerala, Bihar (3) Kerala, Jharkhand (4) Tamilnadu, Bihar Answer as per Initial Key: 3 Answer as per Final Key : 3 (1) Page No.43 of NITI AYOG-2021 Report clearly explains that NITI Ayog doesn’t released SEQI 2021 INDEX. (2) As per SDGI report of NITI AYOG 2021, Answer for this question is OPTION 2, Kerala and Bihar. Objection: Actually the right answer should be OPTION 2 i.e., Kerala, Bihar Note: SEQI for the year 2021 was not released by NITI AYOG. 6. 31 The following was not initiated in the QUAD 2022 SUMMIT held in Tokyo on 24th May 2022? (1) Q-CHAMP (2) HADR (3) IPMDA (4) GISRS Answer as per Initial Key: 4 Answer as per Final Key : 4 The Hindu News Paper published on 3rd September 2022. In that news external affairs minister Mr. Jaishankar announced HADR partnership was finalized in that summit. Objection: Actually the right answer should be both OPTION 2 AND OPTION 4. Because HADR was not initiated it was finalized in that summit. 7. 55 Who made Bombay (Mumbai) as a major commercial hub? (1) Job Chornock (2) Francis De (3) Gerald Aumgrinen (4) Framcois Martin Answer as per Initial Key: 3 Answer as per Final Key : 3 INDIAN HISTORY by Dr. M. ABDUL KAREEM, PAGE NO.479, CHAPTER 16: The Advent of Europeans (16th-17th Century) Objection: Actually the original name is GERALD AUNGIER, but it was wrongly spelt as GERALD AUMGRINEN 8. 17 A Colour blind man married a woman who is daughter of a colour blind father and a homozygous mother with normal vision. What are the chances of their daughter being colour blind? 17 A Colour blind man married a woman who is daughter of a colour blind father and a homozygous mother with normal vision. What are the chances of their daughter being colour blind? (1) 25% (2) 50% (3) 75% (4) 100% Answer as per Initial Key: 2 Answer as per Final Key : 2 Objection : Actually the right answer should be both Option 1 and Option 2. Because in equal distribution of disease each person will get 25% of colour blindness each. In carrier cases there is no guarantee that daughters will get definitely 50% of colour blindness. 4. Denying the allegations/averments made in the Writ Petition, the 1st respondent has filed counter on 02.05.2023 and submitted that the syllabus for the preliminary examination for the posts of SCT SIs (Civil) and its equivalent ranks was specifically mentioned in the notification as shown below : 1. English/Telugu/Urdu (Degree Standard) (Paper-1 and II) 2. Arithmetic (SCC Standard) (Objective Type) 3. Test of Reasoning/Mental Ability (Objective Type) 4. General Studies (Degree Standard) (i) General Science (ii) Current events of national and international importance (iii) History of India, (iv) Geography of India (v) Indian Polity and Economy 5. It is further submitted that Awarding of Marks is for each question, the candidate will be awarded full marks, if he or she darkened only one bubble that corresponds to the correct answer. In case, the candidate has not darkened any bubble he or she will be awarded zero mark for that question. In the said notification, a note was also given that in case of any dispute arises about any question or answer, the decision taken by the Subject Experts Committee shall be final. The Board does not prescribe any particular textbook or publication and is not bound by the material appearing in any book or publication. 6. Based on the above said note, after conducting Preliminary test on 19.02.2023, on the same day a press note was released and called for objections with a note that the candidates may raise objections, if any, on the Preliminary Answer key on or before 23.02.2023 in prescribed format; subsequently, preliminary key was issued on 20.02.2023. Accordingly, total 1553 objections were received from the candidates including petitioners against the preliminary key for the following questions : Q.No.62 Paper-I The Second figure in the first pair of problem figures bears a certain relationship to the first figure. Accordingly, total 1553 objections were received from the candidates including petitioners against the preliminary key for the following questions : Q.No.62 Paper-I The Second figure in the first pair of problem figures bears a certain relationship to the first figure. Similarly, one of the figures in the answer figures bears the same relationship to the first figure, in the second pair of the problem figures. You have to locate the figure which would fit into the blank space marked with (?) and give it as your answer. (1) A (2) B (3) C (4) D Preliminary Key Answer 4 Final Key Answer 4 Petitioners Answer 3 Reference Book: Dr. R.S. Agarwal’s S. Chand publications, Page No.235, reasoning Q.No.86; Answer and Explanation at Page No.272 Subject Experts opinion: The option (4) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: Dr. R.S. Agarwal’s S. Chand Publications, at Page No.272. Expert Committee explanation: The Second figure in first pair of the problem figure is obtained by subjecting the following operations on the first figure. (1) Pentagon is inverted (2) The darkened (black coloured) figure outside the pentagon is kept inside the inverted pentagon and the lower half of its area towards its vertex is whitened (coloured white) When the same process is applied in succession on the first figure of the second pair of the problem figure we get the figure in option (4) Q.No.7 Paper-II According to molecular orbital theory the correct bond order values of species NO, O2 and CO+ -+ respectively is (1) 3.0, 2.5, 1.5 (2) 1.5, 3.0, 2.5 (3) 2.5, 1.5, 3.0 (4) 3.0, 1.5, 2.5 Preliminary Key Answer 4 Final Key Answer 4 Petitioners Answer Correct answer of CO+ is 3.5, but this option is not at all mentioned in the given option 4. [Contd.....] Reference Book:- Text Book for A.P. Intermediate First Year Chemistry (Board of Intermediate Education, Govt. of A.P.). Page No.105, Chapter-3, Chemical Bonding and Molecular Structure. Subject Experts opinion: The option (4) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: B.Sc., First Year, Chemistry, Page No.662, 665. Expert Committee explanation : In given set of species for this question, the bond orders of NO+, O2-are 3.0 and 1.5. These two values are reflected only in option (4) and not in other options (1), (2) and (3). Subject Experts opinion: The option (4) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: B.Sc., First Year, Chemistry, Page No.662, 665. Expert Committee explanation : In given set of species for this question, the bond orders of NO+, O2-are 3.0 and 1.5. These two values are reflected only in option (4) and not in other options (1), (2) and (3). Further, all the candidates are clearly informed through instructions mentioned in Question Paper Booklet to choose the correct or most appropriate answer from the given options. Accordingly, the most appropriate answer for this question is (4). Evidences in support of NO+ bond order 3 and O2-are also submitted. Q.No.17 Paper-II A Colour blind man married a woman who is daughter of a colour blind father and a homozygous mother with normal vision. What are the chances of their daughter being colour blind? (1) 25% (2) 50% (3) 75% (4) 100% Preliminary Key Answer 2 Final Key Answer 2 Petitioners Answer 1 and 2 Because in equal distribution of disease each person will get 25% of colour blindness each. In carrier cases there is no guarantee that daughters will get definitely 50% of colour blindness. Reference Book: Not Referred. [Contd.....] Subject Experts opinion: The option (2) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: Intermediate, Second Year, Board of Intermediate Education, A.P. and Telugu and Sanskrit Academy, A.P., July 2022, Page No.221. Expert Committee explanation: (1) Colour blindness is a sex linked recessive disorder. (2) The son of a women who carries the allele has a 50% chance of being color blind. (3) The mother herself is not colour blind because the allele is recessive. That means the effect is suppressed in her by her matching dominant norman allele. (4) A daughter will not normally colour blind, unless her mother is colour blind or carrier and father is colour blind or carrier and father is colour blind. (5) Justification for the Option (2) can also be substantiated with respect to the following analogy, emphasizing that among daughters, 50% are colour blind. Hence, option (2) is correct. Q.No.31 Paper-II The following was not initiated in the Quad-22 Summit held in Tokyo on 24th May 2022. (1) Q-CHAMP (2) HADR (3) IPMDA (4) GISRS Preliminary Key Answer 4 Final Key Answer 4 Petitioners Answer 2 & 4 Reference: The Hindu News Paper published on 23rd September 2022. Explanation: HADR was not initiated. Hence, option (2) is correct. Q.No.31 Paper-II The following was not initiated in the Quad-22 Summit held in Tokyo on 24th May 2022. (1) Q-CHAMP (2) HADR (3) IPMDA (4) GISRS Preliminary Key Answer 4 Final Key Answer 4 Petitioners Answer 2 & 4 Reference: The Hindu News Paper published on 23rd September 2022. Explanation: HADR was not initiated. It was finalised in that summit because External affairs minister Mr. Jaishankar announced HADR partnership was finalised in that summit. Subject Experts opinion: The option (4) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Web references:- 1. http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022 /05/23/fact-sheet-quad-leaders-tokyo-summit-2022/#:~:text In%20Tokyo%2C%20President%20Biden%2C%20Prime, awareness%20across%20the%20Indo%2DPacific. 2. https://pib.gov.in/Press Release Page.aspx?PRID=1827884 Expert Committee explanation: Many initiatives were announced in QUAD Summit held at Tokyo on 24th May 2022. GISRS is not in the list of Initiatives announced in that Summit. (1) At the Tokyo Summit, the Quad leaders will welcome a major maritime initiative: the Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness (IPMDA). (2) A Quad Climate Change Action and Mitigation Package (Q-CHAMP) was announced to strengthen efforts towards green shipping, clean energy including green hydrogen and climate and disaster resilient infrastructure. (3) A Quad Partnership on Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) for Indo-Pacific was announced by the leaders to enable more effective and timely responses to disasters in the region. Q.No.46 Paper-II Which one of the following place yielded archaeological evidence of pit dwellings? (1) Pallavaram (2) Mehargarh (3) Gufkral (4) Balakot Preliminary Key Answer 3 Final Key Answer 3 Petitioners Answer Actually the Correct Answer for this Question is BURZAHOM, but this option is not at all mentioned in the 4 given options of exam paper. Here GUFKRAL is a vace dwelling not a pit dwelling. Reference Book: Ancient India, A History Test Book for Class XI, NCERT, Page No: 38. Chapter 5 - The Stone Age: The Early Man. Subject Experts opinion: The option (3) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: A History of Ancient and early Medieaval India (From the Stone Age to the 12th Century) by Upinder Singh page No.208. Expert Committee explanation: Did the people actually live in the Burzahom pits? Pits have been found at Neolithic levels at Burzahom and Gufkral in Kashmi and Loebanr III and Kalako-deray in the Swat valley. According to archaeological evidence of pit dwellings, besides Gufkral, some more sites like Burzaham are also there, which are not included in the option list. Expert Committee explanation: Did the people actually live in the Burzahom pits? Pits have been found at Neolithic levels at Burzahom and Gufkral in Kashmi and Loebanr III and Kalako-deray in the Swat valley. According to archaeological evidence of pit dwellings, besides Gufkral, some more sites like Burzaham are also there, which are not included in the option list. Hence, among the given four options, the only suitable and most appropriate answer is Option (3) i.e., Gufkral. Q.No.55 Paper-II Who made Bombay (Mumbai) as a major commercial hub? (1) Job Chornock (2) Francis De (3) Gerald (4) Framcois Martin Preliminary Key Answer 3 Final Key Answer 3 Petitioners Answer Actually the original name is Gerld Aungier, but it was wrongly spelt as Gerald Aumgrinen. Reference Book: Indian History by Dr. M. Abdul Kareem, Page No: 479, Chapter 16: The Advent of Europeans (16th - 17th Century). Subject Experts opinion: The option (3) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: Intermediate, First Year, History by Telugu Akademi, Hyderabad Page No.213. Expert Committee explanation: The King of England in turn gave Bombay to East India Company for ren Jerald Angier developed Bombay into great trading centre. However, instead of mentioning him as Jerald Angier, it is misspelt as Gerald Aumgrinen. In view of this, all other options except (3) cannot be considered, and the most appropriate answer is Option (3). Q.No.62 Paper-II The State producing largest sealing wax in India? (1) Bihar (2) Andhra Pradesh (3) Uttar Pradesh (4) Haryana Preliminary Key Answer 1 Final Key Answer 1 Petitioners Answer Correct answer for this question is Jharkhand, but this option is not at all mentioned in the given 4 options of exam paper. Reference Book: RTI applied and received answer as JHARKHAND from ICAR officials Govt. of India. RTI REGN NO:IINRG/R/E/23/00002. Subject Experts opinion: The option (1) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: Regional Geography of India, published in 2019, prescribed by Govt. of A.P. for BA/B.Sc. Degree fifth semester, Published by Telugu Academy, Hyderabad. Page No.59. Expert Committee explanation: Bihar is the leading producer of Wax. Accordingly, Option (1) is correct answer. This information can also be referred from above book. The reference mentioned in affidavit is an extract of RTI, which may not be appropriate to consider, since some is not augmented with reference to any of the standard academic text book. Page No.59. Expert Committee explanation: Bihar is the leading producer of Wax. Accordingly, Option (1) is correct answer. This information can also be referred from above book. The reference mentioned in affidavit is an extract of RTI, which may not be appropriate to consider, since some is not augmented with reference to any of the standard academic text book. In view of this, all other options except (3) cannot be considered, and the most appropriate answer is Option (3). Q.No.96 Paper-II Based on School Education Quality Index 2021, the Best and Worst performing Indian States are? (1) Tamilnadu, Jharkhand (2) Kerala, Bihar (3) Kerala, Jharkhand (4) Tamilnadu, Bihar Preliminary Key Answer 3 Final Key Answer 3 Petitioners Answer 2 i.e., Kerala, Bihar Note: SEQI for the year 2021 was not released by NITI AYOG. As per SDGI Report of NITI AYOG 2021. Reference: Page No.43 of NITI AYOG – 2021. Subject Experts opinion: The option (3) given in Preliminary Key is correct. Reference Book: School Education Quality Index-NITI Ayog 2021-Advocatetanmoy Law Library, Legal Data Base, Retrieved from Web Site. (https://advocatetanmoy.com/2021/06/06/school-education-quality-index-seqi-nitia-ayog-2021/) Expert Committee explanation: It is clear that, the state of Kerala topped the list with an index of 82.17, while Jharkhand occupied the least position of 20th rank with an index of 30.65 in the country. Hence, option (3) is correct. This question is about “School Education Quality Index 2021’. The Expert Committee while framing this question has also referred “School Education Quality Index-NITI Ayog 2021” Advocatetanmoy Law Library, Legal Data Base, retrieved from above web site. In light of the facts mentioned, some candidates appeared for the examination might have misunderstood the content and further raised objections quoting the reference SDGI report of NITI Ayog 2021. From this Table, it is clear that, the state of Kerala topped the list with an index of 82.17, while Jharkhand occupied the least position of 20th rank with an index of 20.65 in the country. Differences between ‘School Education Quality Index’ and ‘Quality Education’ of SDGI report of NITI Ayog. 7. It is further submitted in their counter that after receiving clarification from the subject experts, Final Answer Key along with result was released on 28.02.2023 through the Press note and informed the candidates that there are no changes in the answer key of 1st paper and one question in 2nd paper has multiple correct answers. 7. It is further submitted in their counter that after receiving clarification from the subject experts, Final Answer Key along with result was released on 28.02.2023 through the Press note and informed the candidates that there are no changes in the answer key of 1st paper and one question in 2nd paper has multiple correct answers. After releasing the key and results, as per the Final Key the marks scored by the petitioners are submitted as follows : S. No. Petitioners Paper-I Paper-II Community Qualifying marks Result 1. S. Nithyanandam 40 29 SC 30 Not Qualified in Paper-II 2. Anuradha All 35 33 BC-D 35 Not Qualified in Paper-II 3. S. Anusha 48 39 OC 40 Not Qualified in Paper-II 4. E. Viswanatha 48 36 OC 40 Not Qualified in Paper-II 5. S. Somsekhar 29 36 SC 30 Not Qualified in Paper-II 6. Mohal Reshma 48 39 OC 40 Not Qualified in Paper-II 7. N. Pujitha Reddy 47 39 OC 40 Not Qualified in Paper-II 8. A. Sabasivudu 50 28 SC 30 Not Qualified in Paper-II 9. B. Anjaneyulu 54 29 ST 30 Not Qualified in Paper-II 10. S. Karteek 41 34 BC-B 35 Not Qualified in Paper-II 11. P. Sowjanya 37 29 SC 30 Not Qualified in Paper-II 12. P. Siva 34 46 BC-D 35 Not Qualified in Paper-II 13. C. Durga Prasad 71 34 BC-A 35 Not Qualified in Paper-II 14. P. Rama Raju 37 34 BC-D 35 Not Qualified in Paper-II 15. G. Purushothama Rao 35 29 BC-A 35 Not Qualified in Paper-II 8. Thus, the petitioners are not qualified in the Preliminary test, they filed the present Writ Petition. But the decision taken by the respondents is on par with the instructions issued in the notification that in case of any dispute arises about any question or answer, the decision taken by the subject Experts Committee shall be final. Therefore, the respondents prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 9. Based on the above pleadings, Sri M. Vijaya Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners demonstrated how the Key is wrong; further, he has mainly stressed about the Question Nos.62, 46, 96 and 55 stating that the answers, which were issued in the Final Key dated 28.02.2023 are contrary to the material placed along with the Objections. Based on the above pleadings, Sri M. Vijaya Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners demonstrated how the Key is wrong; further, he has mainly stressed about the Question Nos.62, 46, 96 and 55 stating that the answers, which were issued in the Final Key dated 28.02.2023 are contrary to the material placed along with the Objections. Learned senior counsel further relied on the decision passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in Kanpur University, through Vice Chancellor and Others Vs. Samir Gupta and Others, (1983) 4 SCC 309 , more particularly para 18, which reads as follows : “18. If the State Government wants to avoid a recurrence of such lapses, it should compile under its own auspices a text book which should be prescribed for students desirous of appearing for the Combined Pre-Medical Test. Education has more than its fair share of politics, which is the bane of our Universities. Numerous problems are bound to arise in the compilation of such a text-book for, various applicants will come forward for doing the job and forces and counter-forces will wage a battle on the question as to who should be commissioned to do the work. If the State can succeed in overcoming those difficulties, the argument will not be open to the students that the answer contained in the text-book which is prescribed for the Test is not the correct answer. Secondly, a system should be devised by the State Government for moderating the key answers furnished by the paper-setters. Thirdly, if English questions have to be translated into Hindi, it is not enough to appoint an expert in the Hindi language as a translator. The translator must know the meaning of the scientific terminology and the art of translation. Fourthly, in a system of ‘multiple choice objective-type test’, care must be taken to see that questions having an ambiguous import are not set in the papers. That kind of system of examination involves merely the tick-marking of the correct answer. It leaves no scope for reasoning or argument. The answer is “yes” or “no”. That is why the questions have to be clear and unequivocal. That kind of system of examination involves merely the tick-marking of the correct answer. It leaves no scope for reasoning or argument. The answer is “yes” or “no”. That is why the questions have to be clear and unequivocal. Lastly, if 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.” 10. As per the above paragraph, the apex court has categorically held that the questions have to be clear and unequivocal, if 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. Relying on the above observations, in the five questions, learned counsel for the petitioners stressed that some questions are provided with incorrect answers or correct answer was not given in the options and for some questions, the answer is ambiguous. Hence, as per the above observations of the Apex Court, the authorities have to reconsider the Key and exclude the disputed questions awarding no marks. 11. He further submitted that the identical issue was considered by this Court in batch of Writ Petitions vide W.P.No.536 of 2020 and Batch with regard to the notification of Group-I services of A.P. Public Service Commission. Following the said observations, the Court disposed of the said batch giving directions to the Service Commission to make appropriate corrections in the marks awarded to the candidates, who appeared for the examination and prepare a new merit list. Therefore, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners requested to allow the Writ Petition directing the 1st respondent Board to revaluate the answer sheets of the petitioners considering the objections of the petitioners and to award marks to the above disputed questions to the petitioners declaring that the petitioners are qualified for the next stage or to set aside the list qualified and direct the respondents to revaluate the answer sheets after excluding the disputed questions. 12. 12. In reply to the said contentions, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents placed the instructions received from the 1st respondent dated 24.06.2023. According to the said instructions, as far as the disputed questions are concerned, for all the questions, most of the candidates have answered correctly i.e.,17560 to 62815 candidates. Apart from that he has also placed the marks awarded to the disputed questions to the petitioners also. In fact, majority of the petitioners have made correct answers to some of the disputed questions. Accordingly, they have also got marks to the disputed questions. Further, it is submitted that as per the notification, the respondents have prepared the key and prepared the qualified candidates list. In fact, as per the note of the notification, it is made clear that in case of disputed questions or answers, opinion of the Expert Committee is final. Accordingly, the respondent authorities have referred the objections to the Expert Committee and as per their opinion the respondents issued the final Key, which is in accordance with the notification. 13. Learned Government Pleader further relied on the latest judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court, in State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Karunesh Kumar and Others, 2022 SCC Online SC 1706 and in the case of Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission [U.P.P.S.C.], through its Chairman and Anr. Vs. Rahul Singh and Another Vide Civil Appeal No.5838 of 2018. The relevant paragraphs are extracted herein under : “8. In the appeal filed by the Commission it has been urged that the High Court transgressed its jurisdiction and went beyond the scope of judicial review available in such cases and it should not have overruled the view of the Commission which was based on the report of two committees of experts. On the other hand one of the original writ petitioners in his appeal claims that as far as the question where the High Court has held more than one answer is correct, the same should be deleted and in respect of another question it is urged that the High Court wrongly accepted answer of the Commission.” …. 10. In Kanpur University, through Vice Chancellor and Others Vs. Samir Gupta and Others', this Court was dealing with a case relating to the Combined Pre Medical Test. 10. In Kanpur University, through Vice Chancellor and Others Vs. Samir Gupta and Others', this Court was dealing with a case relating to the Combined Pre Medical Test. Admittedly, the examination setter himself had provided the key answers and there were no committees to moderate or verify the correctness of the key answers provided by the examiner. This Court upheld the view of the Allahabad High Court that the students had proved that 3 of the key answers were wrong. Following observations of the Court are permanent. "….We agree that the key answer should be assumed to be correct unless it is proved to be wrong and that it should not be held to be wrong by an inferential process of reasoning or by a process of rationalization. It must be clearly demonstrated 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….” We may also refer to the following observations in Paras 31 and 32 which show why the Constitutional Courts must exercise restraint in such matters. 31. On our part we may add that sympathy or compassion does not play any role in the matter of directing or not directing reevaluation of an answer sheet. If an error is committed by the examination authority, the complete body of candidates suffers. The entire examination process does not deserve to be derailed only because some candidates are disappointed or dissatisfied or perceive some injustice having been caused to them by an erroneous question or an erroneous answer. All candidates suffer equally, though some might suffer more but that cannot be helped since mathematical precision is not always possible. This Court has shown one way out of an impasse - exclude the suspect or offending question. 32. It is rather unfortunate that despite several decisions of this Court, some of which have been discussed above, there is interference by the courts in the result of examinations. This places the examination authorities in an unenviable position where they are under scrutiny and not the candidates. Additionally, a massive and sometimes prolonged examination exercise concludes with an air of uncertainty. While there is no doubt that candidates put in a tremendous effort in preparing for an examination, it must not be forgotten that even the examination authorities put in equally great efforts to successfully conduct an examination. Additionally, a massive and sometimes prolonged examination exercise concludes with an air of uncertainty. While there is no doubt that candidates put in a tremendous effort in preparing for an examination, it must not be forgotten that even the examination authorities put in equally great efforts to successfully conduct an examination. The enormity of the task might reveal some lapse at a later stage, but the court must consider the internal checks and balances put in place by the examination authorities before interfering with the efforts put in by the candidates who have successfully participated in the examination and the examination authorities. The present appeals are a classic example of the consequence of such interference where there is no finality to the result of the examinations even after a lapse of eight years. Apart from the examination authorities even the candidates are left wondering about the certainty or otherwise of the result of the examination - whether they have passed or not - whether their result will be approved or disapproved by the court; - whether they will get admission in a college or university or not; and - whether they will get recruited or not. This unsatisfactory situation does not work to anybody's advantage and such a state of uncertainty results in confusion being worse confounded. The overall and larger impact of all this is that public interest suffers." The law is well settled that the onus is on the candidate to not only demonstrate that the key answer is incorrect but also that it is a glaring mistake which is totally apparent and no inferential process or reasoning is required to show that the key answer is wrong. The Constitutional Courts must exercise great restraint in a plea such matters and should be reluctant should be reluctant to entertain In Kanpur challenging the correctness of the key answers. University case (supra), the Court recommended a system of - moderation; (2) avoiding ambiguity in the questions; (3) prompt decisions be taken to exclude suspected questions and no marks be assigned to such questions.” 14. University case (supra), the Court recommended a system of - moderation; (2) avoiding ambiguity in the questions; (3) prompt decisions be taken to exclude suspected questions and no marks be assigned to such questions.” 14. As per the above observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it is very clear that unless and until the candidate demonstrates that the Key answers are patently wrong on the face of it, the Courts cannot entertain the academic field, weigh the pros and cons of the arguments given by both sides and then come to the conclusion as to which of the answer is better or more accurate. Finally, it is held that the High Court over stepped its jurisdiction by giving the directions which amounted to setting aside the decision of experts in the field. Hence, even in the instant case, though the petitioners made objections with regard to the answers made to the above disputed questions, the fact remains that the subject experts have given the Key based on the relevant material, which was placed in the counter. In the said circumstances, he requested not to interfere with the selection process, as the more number of candidates are involved. 15. Learned Government Pleader further brought to the notice of this Court that with regard to the disputed questions, earlier some of the candidates also filed W.P.No.5339 of 2023, following the above judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court, this court has dismissed the said Writ Petition. Hence, this matter is also squarely covered by the orders passed by this Court earlier in the said Writ Petition. 16. Considering the submissions made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, no doubt as per the pleadings demonstrated by the learned senior counsel with regard to the disputed questions, there is some ambiguity in the answer key; but fact remains that the petitioners herein also answered and got marks for the disputed questions, so also more than 62,000 candidates have answered and got marks to the said questions. In the said circumstances, in view of the observations made by the Apex Court in the U.P.P.S.C.’s case vide Civil Appeal No.5838 of 2018 and following the observations of this court in W.P. No.5339 of 2023, this Writ Petition also stands dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.