Samapti Chatterjee, J. - (1.) This Court has already decided the above-mentioned issues in the judgment delivered on 27th July, 2018 in W.P No.23006 (W) of 2017 and others. In the said matter this Court initially on passed an interim order thereby appointing the Vice Chancellor of Visva Bharati to examine correctness of the 11 numbers of question of JGB Question Booklet series by the experts and filed the report of the expert to that effect.
(2.) Accordingly, this Court in the order dated 27th July, 2018 directed the Vice Chancellor of Visva Bharati University to appoint expert in the relevant subject for examining the correctness of the key answers which will be binding upon all parties as agreed by the parties.
(3.) Since the petitioner has filed the present writ petition prior to the interim order dated 27th July 2018, therefore, in my opinion petitioner is entitled to get order in the line of the interim order dated 27th July 2018 as well as the judgment dated 3rd October 2018, passed in the said writ petition. The interim order dated 27th July 2018, as well as judgement and order dated 3rd October 2018, is quoted below:- Option (B) as give in recognized text book is the correct answer and not option (C). "B" in respect of Question No.78 of Section III, Child Development and Pedagogy subject is the correct answer and other options given are incorrect. JUDGEMENT_94_LAWS(CAL)11_2018_1.html "The following issues are to be determined in the present writ petition :- (i) Whether in multiple choice of objective type test, wrong key answers supplied by the paper setter should be ascertained by external experts on the subject? (ii) Whether candidates are entitled to be awarded with full marks for wrong key answers supplied by the paper setter ? 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for the following reliefs :- (a) A writ of or in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding the respondents, their agents, servants, subordinates, employees and/or assignees to reassess and/or re-evaluate the OMR sheet of the petitioner of TET 2014 and award full marks to question no.9, 22 and 25 of Section-I, Language-I, Bengali subject and question no.78 of Section -III Chile Development and Pedagogy of question booklet series no. JGB and declare the petitioner as qualified in TET 2014 and to follow consequential steps for recruitment to the post of Assistant Teacher under the concerned Primary School Council; (b) A writ of or in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding the respondents, their agents, servants, subordinates, employees and/or assignees to appoint your petitioner as trained candidate for the post of Assistant Teacher pursuant to the selection process of 2016 under the Kolkata Primary School Council. (c) A Writ in the nature of Certiorari commanding the Respondents to transmit and produce the entire original records before this Hon'ble Court so that conscionable justice may be administered and by granting other relief as prayed hereinabove; (d) Issue Rule NISI in terms of prayers (a) to ( c ) as above (e) A order do issue directing the Respondent Council to keep 1 post of Primary Teacher vacant under the Respondent Council till the disposal of the Writ Application. (f) Ad interim Order in terms of the prayers (e) of this application, as above. (g) And to pass such other or further Orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper. 3. Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Ld. Sr. Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an OBC-B candidate. The petitioner passed higher secondary level examination with 72.3 % marks and also completed two years diploma in elementary education. The petitioner participated in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) 2014 held on 11th October 2015. Unfortunately the petitioner was not shown as successful in the TET examination. It is also submitted by Mr. Bhattacharyya that immediately after declaration of result of TET 2014 the petitioner made an application under Right to Information Act, 2005 for supplying the OMR sheet question paper and key answer. Accordingly on 10th August, 2017 the Secretary of the Board supplied the question paper OMR sheet and answer key also. 4. Mr. Bhattacharyya further contended that after scrutinizing the question paper answer key and the OMR sheet it was detected by the petitioner that though the petitioner answered correctly in respect of Question No.9 of Section-I, Language-I Bengali subject and 78 of Section III Chile Development and Pedagogy she was not awarded any marks. It was also stated that in respect of Question No.22 and 25 of Section-I, Language-I Bengali subject the options that were given were incorrect answers and as such in spite of attempting those questions since the answers were wrong petitioner was not awarded any marks. Therefore, due to wrong answer key and wrong assessment of OMR sheet petitioner was short of one mark to be successful in the TET examination . Mr. Bhattacharyya further submitted that in regard to Question No.9 of Section I, Language I Bengali subject runs as follows in Bengali Script : That in the answer key the Question No.9 of Section I, Language I Bengali subject was answered as (D) [1] and the petitioner gave the answer as (B) [2] It is stated that the petitioner has correctly answered as "B" but because of illegal and wrong assessment the petitioner was not awarded any marks although recognized text books and dictionaries shows that correct answer to Question No.9 is (B). Furthermore, a renowned scholar of Bengali literature and subject has also opined that correct answer to Question No.9 is (B). Mr. Bhattacharyya further submitted that in regard to Question No.78 of Section III, Child Development and Pedagogy Subject runs as follows : Which of the following elements is least important in the learning process? (A) Syllabus (B) Teacher (C) Environment (D) Cooperation That in the answer key the Question No.78 of Section III, Child Development and Pedagogy subject was answered as (B) (Teacher) and the petitioner gave the answer as ( C ) (Environment). It is stated that the petitioner has correctly answered as "C" but because of illegal and wrong assessment the petitioner was not awarded any marks although recognized text books shows that (B) is not the correct answer as given in the answer key. Mr. Bhattacharyya further submitted that in regard to Question No.22 of Section I, Language I Bengali subject runs as follows in Bengali script : That the answer key the Question No.22 of Section I, Language I Bengali subject was answered as ( C ) [3] Be it stated here that as regards Question No.22 options of answers were all incorrect and as such in spite of attempting the said question, petitioner was not given any marks because of incorrect assessment and wrong answer options. Furthermore, a renowned scholar of Bengali literature and subject has also opined that options that were given in respect of Question No.22 are wrong options. Mr. Bhattacharyya further stated that in regard to Question No.25 of Section I, Language I Bengali subject runs as follows in Bengali script : IMAGE 3 That in the answer key the Question No.25 of Section I, language I Bengali subject was answered as ( C ) [4] Be it stated here that as regards Question No.25 options of answers were all incorrect and as such in spite of attempting the said question petitioner was not given any marks because of incorrect assessment and wrong answer options. Furthermore, a renowned scholar of Bengali literature and subject has also opined that options that were given in respect of Question No.25 are wrong options. 5. Mr. Bhattacharyya further vehemently urged that petitioner scored 82 marks and if the mistake and omission of the board is corrected or rectified then petitioner would come under the zone of consideration as she lacks only one mark. It was also vehemently argued by Mr. Bhattacharyya that if the OMR of the petitioner is re-assessed and/or re-evaluated upon causing necessary correction in the answer key then it would be found that petitioner scored much more marks than the last candidate called for counciling and subsequently appointed by the concerned respondent. In support of his contention Mr. Bhattacharyya drew Court's attention at Page-22 to 81. 6. Mr. Bhattacharyya also handed up photocopy of [5] as well as question booklet series. 7. Mr. Bhattacharyya further emphasized in his argument that according to Grammar (B) is the correct answer but key answer of the Board it is (A) which is wrong. He further contended that in Question No.9 correct answer is (B) but according to the board correct answer is D. Mr. Bhattacharyya also argued that all four (4) options to Question No.22 are wrong. In respect of Question No.25 according to the board ( C ) is the correct answer but according to the petitioner all options are wrong. 8. In all the above-mentioned writ petitions all total 11 key answers are wrong : IMAGE 4 In support of his contention Mr. Bhattacharyya relied on a Hon'ble Supreme Court decision reported in Kanpur University, Through Vice-Chancellor And Others vs Samir Gupta and Others, 1983 4 SCC 309and submitted that if the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said decision is applied in the case of the petitioner then the petitioner should have been given particular marks declaring the petitioner as successful candidate and upon being qualified/passed TET examination petitioner could have been offered appointment in any primary school under the said District. On the same issue Mr. Bhattacharyya also relied on a Hon'ble Supreme Court decision reported in Manish Ujwal And Others vs Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati University And Others, 2005 13 SCC 744 9. Before parting with his argument Mr. Bhattacharyya submitted that Court should appoint some expert to examine the correctness of the key answers of the question numbers 1, 2, 6, 9, 11, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26, & 78. Mr. Bhattachryya further contended that Court may direct the Vice Chancellor of Visva Bharati University to appoint experts in the relevant subject for examining the correctness of the key answers. Thereafter, submit the experts' report before this Hon'ble Court. 10. Per contra, Mr. L.K. Gupta learned senior Counsel appearing for the board submitted that the petitioner has become wiser after obtaining OMR sheet. They were not at all aware regarding wrong key answers. When the petitioner was in examination hall at that time she was not at all aware of the wrong key answers. 11. It was further strongly contended by Mr. Gupta that the petitioner never answered Question No.9 of Section-I, Language-I Bengali subject and 78 of Section III Chile Development and Pedagogy as has been projected by Mr. Bhattacharyya. 12. It was also vehemently argued by Mr. Gupta that Question Nos 22 and 25 of Section_I, Language-I, Bengali subject the options given were correct. It was also urged by Mr. Gupta that in regard to Question No.9 Section I Bengali which reads as : IMAGE 5 Mr. Gupta further contended that according to Bengali Dictionary of Haricharan Bandopadhyay-(A) "Prachet" is adjective (Bisheson) and not noun (Bisheshaw) (Page 1372) ; (B) "Prachi" is adjective (Bisheson) and not noun (Bisheshaw) (Page-1407); (C) "Prachin" is adjective (Bisheson) and not noun (Bisheshaw) (Page 1407). According to Sansad Bangla Abhidhan compiled by Sailendra Biswas (5th Edition and 15th reprint in April, 2010, Page-554). "Prachha" is noun (Bisheshaw). Mr Gupta also submitted that examination system should be given proper weight and credibility. Mr. Gupta further contended that Question No.78 Section III reads as : "Which of the following elements is least important in the learning process? (A) Syllabus (B) Teacher (C) Environment (D) Cooperation Option (B) as give in recognized text book is the correct answer and not option (C). "B" in respect of Question No.78 of Section III, Child Development and Pedagogy subject is the correct answer and other options given are incorrect. Mr. Gupta also contended that Question No.22, Section-I Bengali reads as : IMAGE 6 Mr. Gupta further strongly opposed that all the options for answer to Question No.22 of SectionI, Language I, Bengali were incorrect including answer "C". Mr. Gupta also contended that in regard to Question No.22 it may further be stated that in the alphabets (Barnomala) of Bengali language, oneswar , chandrabindu and bisorgo have some special characteristics. These letters (Bornas) are not only said to be "ashraysthanbhagi borna" but also as "ajogbaho borno". Those letters (bornas) cannot be uttered without the help of previous (Purbaborti) saraborna, they are called "ashraysth anbhagi borna". Again, "ajog" means one not having any connection with consonants (banjon) or vowel (swar) and therefore, they are "ajog". Mr. Gupta further submitted that in regard to Question No.25, Section I Bengali which reads as : IMAGE 7 Mr. Gupta further strongly opposed that all the options regarding question no.25 of Section I, Language I Bengali subject were incorrect. 13. However, before concluding his submission Mr. Gupta in his usual fairness accepted the proposal advanced by Mr. Bhattacharyya to refer the matter before Vice Chancellor of the Visva Bharati University to appoint expert in the relevant subject for examining the correctness of the key answers. Mr. Gupta further submitted that expert opinion shall be binding upon all parties as agreed by the parties. 14. That being the scenario and considering the submissions advanced by the learned advocates and after perusing the records and the decisions relied on by Mr. Bhattacharyya as Kanpur University case (supra) and Manish Ujwal case (supra) I direct the Vice Chancellor of Visva Bharati University to appoint expert in the relevant subject for examining the correctness of the key answers. The expert opinion shall be binding upon all parties as agreed by the parties. The Vice Chancellor of the Visva Bharati University is directed to submit the decision of the experts through the Registrar General of this Hon'ble Court in a sealed envelop by 19th September, 2018. 15. Let the matter appear on 19th September 2018 at 2 P.M. under the heading "For Judgement". 16. Needless to mention that if the experts opine that the key answers of the questions referred above are wrong then the West Bengal Board of Primary Education may be directed to award full marks for those questions to all the petitioners who appeared for Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) in the year 2014. Accordingly the board shall publish a fresh list of qualified candidates. 17. Registrar General of this Hon'ble Court is directed to forward the urgent photo copy of this order along with the JGB TEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET) 2014 Question Booklet as well as the Key Answers to the Vice Chancellor of the Visva Bharati University. . Pursuant to the earlier order dated 27th July, 2018, The Vice Chancellor of Visva Bharati through letter dated 23rd September, 2018 issued by Sabuj koli Sen submitted the expert report in respect of 10 (ten) questions. Since the expert report in respect of Question No.78 was not received by the Court through its Registrar General therefore on 19th September, 2018 this Court directed the Vice Chancellor of the Visva Bharati to submit expert report pertinent to Question No.78 and the matter was fixed on 03.10.2018 for judgment. 19. Subsequently, the expert report in respect of Question No.78 was received by the Registrar General of the Hon'ble High Court and was duly placed before this Hon'ble Court. Both expert reports are quoted below :- IMAGE 8 JUDGEMENT_94_LAWS(CAL)11_2018_2.html 20. Considering the above discussions and after perusing the expert reports I direct the Secretary, West Bengal Board of Primary Education to award marks to the petitioner/petitioners who attempted the wrong question/options in the key answers of JGB question booklet series. After awarding marks if it is found that the petitioner/petitioners is/are other wise eligible to give appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher/Teachers then the Secretary is further directed to take steps to give appointment t to the petitioner/petitioners in accordance with law. 21. The entire exercise shall be completed within three months from the date of judgment. 22. Needless to mention this order is strictly restricted in respect of writ petitions mentioned as above. 23. With these directions, this writ petition is allowed without any order as to costs. 24. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on priority basis.";