Picking holes in academic pasture not domain of the Court: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on Monday held that courts should be averse to substitute its wisdom for the opinion of experts in the academic field [Aravind TR & Ors. v Kerala University of Health Sciences]..Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V said that it is not the domain of courts to trench in the academic pasture and pick holes in it."It is not the domain of the Courts to trench in the academic pasture and pick holes therein. It has been held by the Apex Court that Courts should be averse to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to the opinion of experts in the field," the Court stated in its judgement..The Court held so while dismissing a plea challenging the question papers of MBBS exams at the Kerala University of Health Sciences as it found that the same were set on the basis of recommendations by experts."This Court cannot sit in judgment over the decisions of an academic body in so far as it sets the questions for a subject, particularly when this Court has no domain expertise in these matters. The petitioners have not been able to point out any blatant violation of the statutory provisions, Rules, Regulations or Guidelines," the judgement stated..It is not the domain of the Courts to trench in the academic pasture and pick holes therein.Kerala High Court.The Court was considering a petition moved by 92 MBBS students course from various colleges affiliated with the Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS). The petitioner-students contended that the question papers set for the final year MBBS supplementary examination in two general medicine papers held in November 2021 were not in conformity with the examination manual and as per the prescriptions in the syllabus and model questions issued by the university. Therefore, they sought orders to declare that they had passed the said exams and sought grace marks. They also sought enquiry into their allegations regarding the violations of the examination manual..However, the university filed a statement in which it was stated that the question paper setters are appointed by the Controller of Examinations for the subjects concerned out of panels prepared based on recommendations of the Board of Studies..The Court found that materials placed before it revealed that a foolproof procedure was followed by the University while selecting the panel of question paper setters. The material also disclosed that the university appointed paper scrutinizers to verify whether the papers were set as per the syllabus.Therefore, the Court dismissed the petition.The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate S Sreekumar instructed by advocate Manoj Ramaswamy. The University was represented by its Standing Counsel, advocate P Sreekumar. .[Read Judgment]