Mere Repetition of Questions from Previous Exam Does Not Vitiate Recruitment; Courts Cannot Interfere with Expert-Approved Answer Keys Unless Demonstrably Wrong: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Case Name: Brahampal and Others v. State of Haryana and Others
Date of Judgment: 12 October 2026
Citation: CWP No. 22532 of 2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar
Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that Courts cannot sit in appeal over the opinion of subject experts concerning the correctness of answer keys in competitive examinations, unless an error is demonstrably apparent without resorting to inferential reasoning. Deletion of erroneous or ambiguous questions on expert advice, when uniformly applied to all candidates, is permissible. The Court further held that mere repetition of questions from an examination previously conducted by another recruiting agency does not vitiate the selection process in the absence of evidence establishing prior disclosure, unfair advantage or prejudice.
Summary: The High Court adjudicated writ petitions challenging the Haryana Public Service Commission’s (HPSC) final answer key and screening test results for recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor (Geography). The petitioners questioned the deletion of 10 questions, alteration of answers to six questions and alleged repetition of 30 questions from an earlier Bihar Public Service Commission examination. They sought correction of the answer key, re-evaluation of OMR sheets and publication of a revised merit list.
The Court observed that the disputed questions had already undergone scrutiny by subject experts on two occasions and that no allegations of mala fides, bias or incompetence had been raised against them. Referring to Ran Vijay Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2018) 2 SCC 357, and U.P. Public Service Commission v. Rahul Singh, (2018) 7 SCC 254, the Court reiterated that judicial review in academic matters is extremely limited and that Courts cannot substitute their assessment of textbook material for the conclusions of subject experts.
Regarding deletion of questions, the Court noted that the marks of all candidates had been uniformly recalculated out of 90 and scaled to 100. Consequently, no candidate suffered comparative disadvantage, nor could any candidate claim an enforceable right to marks for deleted questions.
The Court also rejected the argument that repetition of 30 questions from an earlier examination undermined the screening test. Relying on Varun Girdhar v. State of Haryana, LPA No. 1054 of 2023, it held that similarity of questions alone cannot invalidate an examination without material demonstrating prior access or an unfair advantage to particular candidates.
Further, applying Vanshika Yadav v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 568, the Court reiterated that cancellation of an examination requires evidence of systemic compromise of its integrity. The deletion of 10% of the questions on expert advice did not satisfy that threshold.
Decision: The High Court dismissed all writ petitions, upholding the HPSC’s final answer key dated 27.06.2025, announcement dated 03.07.2025 and screening test result dated 11.07.2025. Finding no demonstrable error, arbitrariness, mala fides or violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, the Court declined to interfere with the recruitment process.