New Delhi, Feb 5 : The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by unsuccessful civil services aspirants challenging certain questions in the Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination, 2023, particularly Paper-II (CSAT), holding that courts cannot sit in appeal over the opinion of subject experts or interfere in academic matters in the absence of arbitrariness, mala fides, or patent illegality.

A bench of Justices Amit Mahajan and Anil Kshetarpal upheld the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had earlier rejected the aspirantsâ?? plea alleging that around 11 questions in the Civil Service Aptitude Test (CSAT) paper were beyond the prescribed syllabus.

"The scope of judicial review in matters relating to competitive examinations is extremely limited. The court does not sit in appeal over the decision of an examining body nor does it substitute its own opinion for that of subject experts," the Justice Mahajan-led Bench observed.

The petitioners, who were unsuccessful candidates in the Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination 2023, had contended that the impugned questions were drawn from Class XI and XII NCERT syllabi, despite the examination rules stipulating that CSAT questions should be of Class X level.

They argued that the inclusion of such questions resulted in an uneven playing field and vitiated the entire selection process.

Rejecting the contention, the Delhi High Court noted that the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) had placed before it the report of an Expert Committee, constituted to examine objections raised by candidates, which categorically concluded that all the questioned items were within the prescribed syllabus and that the mathematical questions did not exceed the Class X level.

"Once the Committee of Experts, who have expertise and wisdom exclusively over the subject-matter, has opined that the questions were within the syllabus and found that the objections are not sustainable, the very basis of compensatory or corrective reliefs does not survive," the bench said, adding that it lacked the institutional competence to re-examine the nature or standard of questions.

It further stated that mere disagreement with the academic assessment of experts, "without demonstrating perversity or manifest error, cannot furnish a ground for judicial interference".

Apart from merits, the Delhi High Court accepted the preliminary objection on non-joinder of necessary parties, highlighting that the reliefs sought, including preparation of a revised merit list or fresh examinations, would directly affect candidates who had already been selected and appointed, but were not impleaded in the case.

"Admittedly, none of the selected candidates have been impleaded. (I)t is settled that no adverse order can be passed affecting the rights of a person without affording an opportunity of hearing," it observed.

Noting that the entire Civil Services Examination 2023 process had long concluded and subsequent examinations had already been held, the Delhi High Court held that it would not exercise writ jurisdiction to grant "infructuous reliefs" in matters involving large-scale public examinations. Finding no infirmity in the CATâ??s decision, the Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition and disposed of all pending applications.

/IANS