Jasmine v. State Of Haryana And Another


 






 





 


 

  


   









 










 !"!

#$
%&%









































   
 


  

 







 

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA




 



!"#$ 


%#

&  #





&
 #
&'
!"#$ 
 (



 '






 & '

) *
!"#$ 



%#
&#!
#
+,-#..

 #












TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the result of screening test dated 27.06.2025 for the examination held on 08.06.2025 for the recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor (College Cadre) in Geography in furtherance of advertisement no. 51 dated 02.08.2024, Annexure P-1. Also, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing respondent no. 2/Commission to declare those answers of the petitioner as correct which she marked right but were declared wrong by the Commission without assigning any reason.
2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that answers to three questions of screening test, i.e., question no. 26, 44 and 46 of the Master Set were wrongly changed in the final answer key. Resultantly, the SEEMA 2025.08.01 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document


 








petitioner could not clear the test, though she correctly answered the questions as per the provisional answer key uploaded by the Commission. It is also contended that questions no. 17, 19, 20, 36, 52 and 76 of Master Set were wrongly deleted, and these had also been correctly answered by her as per the provisional answer key.
3.

Pursuant to the last order, learned counsel for the Commission has produced subject experts' report in a sealed cover, based upon which the final answer key to the test was uploaded by the Commission on 27.06.2025, as also the screening test result. The report has been perused, resealed and returned to the learned counsel. A perusal of the report shows that after considering the objections to the aforementioned questions, the subject experts advised change of answers or deletion of questions for varied reasons. The Commission accordingly prepared the final answer key as also the screening test result. There is no allegation of mala fide on the part of the Subject Experts, who are holding senior academic positions in Universities. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain the petition in view of law settled in CWP-30309-2024 titled Amit and others v. State of Haryana and others.
4.

Dismissed.














'TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA(
/0 01 +0+2























  




 


SEEMA 2025.08.01 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document