Md Sanaullah v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE

Present:

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE JAY SENGUPTA WPA 7401 of 2022 Md. Sanaullah Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

For the petitioner :

Mr. Ekramul Bari Sk. Imtiaj Uddin For the State :

Mr. Swapan Kr. Datta Mr. Tapas Kr. Mandal For the University :

Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee Mr. Satyaki Banerjee For the WBCSC : Mr. Pulak Ranjan Mondal Ms. Bandana Mondal Mr. Subhrangsu Panda Heard on :

12.11.2024 Judgment on : 12.11.2024 JAY SENGUPTA, J:

The petitioner has challenged certain answer keys for questions set for the 23rd State Eligibility Test, 2022 in the subject of History.

Normally, Courts would not venture into such arena as it is the domain of appropriate experts. However, in the present case the questions were such as are quite capable of having plain and objective answers. In fact, in the course of the proceedings the WBCSC and the CU both filed their respective experts' opinions over the issue. Out of four questions all the experts agree that for the question number 54 the petitioner marked the answer correctly and for question number 86 the petitioner answered the question wrongly. So far as the question number 22 is concerned according to the report available from the Calcutta University the correct answer was not there in the four options provided by the College Service Commission. Therefore, the petitioner ought to get advantage for the same.

As regards question number 70, according to the report available from the University of Calcutta the petitioner attended the right answer and the Commission in the answer key had provided wrong answer. However, this is denied by the experts' opinion available from the Burdwan University. As there is a doubt regarding the answer to question number 70, the petitioner should quite obviously get the benefit of doubt. In the result the petitioner should get the marks for answering the questions being question numbers 22, 54 and 70. While for question number 86 it is an admitted position that the petitioner had marked the answer incorrectly.

Therefore, let the respondent authorities act in terms of the above and do the needful at the earliest.

No further order need be passed in this regard. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.

(Jay Sengupta, J) tbsr