Bhutachajee, J. - (1.) I have had the advantage of going through the draft of the very well-written, well-considered and comprehensive Judgement of Ray, J., and I agree with the order proposed by him in his judgment appearing hereinafter and particularly in the concluding paragraph.
(2.) The weight, the elaborate reasoning, the eloquence and also the length of his judgment ought to have hushed me into silence. But notwithstanding my concurrence in the order proposed of him, I propose to come out with a separate not spelling out the process of my own reasoning as on some aspect of the case, I do not, as at present advised, intend to go so far ai Ray, J., proposes to go.
(3.) The writ-petitioners challenge the correctness of the test-examination for ad mission to the post-graduate medical courses. The petition examination of what is called 'Multiple-Choice Objective Type test. One paper is sol for each discipline containing 95 questions; four alternative answers are given to each question and the candidate is to choice by putting a tick-mark to the most appropriate answer. One maria to be allotted for the correct choice, half-mark to bi deducted for an incorrect choice. The Paper-setter supplies to the University the correct answers to each question, called the 'Key Answer'. The petitioners contended that they were wrongly failed on the basil of such key answers as many of those answers were wrong while their answer were correct. The earned trial Judge accepted their contention and held many of the Key answers to be wrong and the candidates' answers to be right after delving into a large number of opinions of the experts and a larger number of text-books. The petitioners, as Respondent before us, have also invited us to approve the course. I regret that I cannot, does brother Ray.;