Courts must exercise restraint when expert opinion challenged

0
1625
LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Whatsapp
Telegram
Copy link

The Supreme Court recently observed that judges are not and cannot be experts in all fields, and therefore must exercise great restraint and not overstep their jurisdiction to interfere with the opinion of experts.

In UPPSC through its chairman v Rahul Singh, the Supreme Court presided over petitions by candidates challenging the correctness of the key answers to preliminary examinations conducted by the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (UPPSC) in 2017 for various posts in its provincial civil services. The petitioners contended that some of the key answers in the examination were incorrect or that some of the questions had more than one right answer. Allahabad High Court directed for that the answer sheets of the preliminary examination for upper-subordinate services in Uttar Pradesh be re-evaluated and disagreed with the view of the UPPSC. The court accepted the submission of the petitioners that the answers given in the key were incorrect.

You must be a subscribersubscribersubscribersubscriber to read this content, please subscribesubscribesubscribesubscribe today.

For group subscribers, please click here to access.
Interested in group subscription? Please contact us.

你需要登录去解锁本文内容。欢迎注册账号。如果想阅读月刊所有文章,欢迎成为我们的订阅会员成为我们的订阅会员

已有集团订阅,可点击此处继续浏览。
如对集团订阅感兴趣,请联络我们

The dispute digest is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.

LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Whatsapp
Telegram
Copy link