The Supreme Court has intervened in the 2021-2022 Revenue Lekhpal examination conducted by the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Services Selection Commission (UPSSSC), directing a re-evaluation of answer sheets for over 8,000 candidates. This decision, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran, addresses ambiguities identified in several questions and their corresponding answer keys, which had impacted the selection process for 8,085 vacancies.
The Court specifically examined three disputed questions from Booklet Series “B”:
-
Question 58 (Salt Satyagraha Location): The question asked about the starting point of Mahatma Gandhi’s Salt Satyagraha, with options (A) Dandi, (B) Surat, (C) Sabarmati, and (D) Pawnar. Acknowledging that while the march commenced from Sabarmati, the act of violating the salt law occurred at Dandi, the Court ruled that both options (A) Dandi and (C) Sabarmati should be considered correct. Consequently, the Court directed the UPSSSC to award full marks to candidates who chose either of these options.
-
Question 63 (Longest National Highway in UP): Given the outdated designations of National Highways, the Court accepted both option (C) NH2 and (D) None of these as valid answers.
-
Question 90 (Solar Photovoltaic Irrigation Pump Scheme Grant): This question concerned the grant amount for small and marginal farmers for an 1800-watt (2 HP) surface solar pump, in addition to the Central Government subsidy. The provided options were 15%, 30%, 45%, and none of the above. The Court noted that due to policy changes over time, both 30% (B) and 45% (C) represented valid answers at different points. Therefore, candidates who selected either of these options are entitled to full marks.
The Supreme Court expressed its concern over the “ambiguous or unclear questions” framed by the UPSSSC, emphasizing that such errors should not disadvantage the candidates. While ordering the re-evaluation and awarding of marks to the affected candidates (including the appellants in the case), the Court explicitly directed the Commission to protect the already selected candidates to avoid disruption of the ongoing recruitment process.
In its order, the bench stated, “We note with some concern that the deficiency in this case lies at the Commission’s end as well for the kind of questions framed which were ambiguous or having more than one answers as correct.”
The Court concluded by directing the UPSSSC to “re-evaluate the answer scripts in light of the above findings and award marks only to the candidates/appellants herein, and continue the selection process without disturbing the candidates who have already been selected.”
The case, titled Reetesh Kumar Singh & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., was registered as Civil Appeal Nos. 12069-12076 and 5503 of 2025, and its citation is 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 523. This judgment underscores the judiciary’s role in ensuring fairness and accuracy in public service examinations.
