In Brief
A candidate who failed the written examination for Punjab and Haryana Superior Judicial Service challenged the High Court's dismissal of his writ petition. He alleged procedural defects: Paper V (Criminal Law) was missing Question 4 initially; Paper VI had no OMR sheets; and marks were not disclosed under the Right to Information Act. The Supreme Court found the missing question was a serious procedural lapse, though not fatal. It held that marks in multi-stage recruitment should not be disclosed before viva voce (to avoid interview bias), but provisional answer keys should be published for transparency. The Court set aside the High Court's judgment and directed re-evaluation of Paper V excluding the supplementary question, followed by fresh result declaration and viva voce with a common interview board."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.