Admission Board

Candidate (appellant) contended that Admission Board (respondent) fixed cut-off marks for the subject in question arbitrarily and in a mala fide manner, and that on account of personal enmity and rivalry with the candidate's father, the Board manipulated the ranking and selection process to deny admission to the candidate

Validity

Procedure adopted by the Board might have appeared to be highly cumbersome and complicated, but the object of said procedure for arriving at the cut-off marks was to select candidates well equipped in all the subjects, with reference to their merit, weighed against the average merit of all the candidates who appeared in the examination

Fact that the procedure was complicated would not make it arbitrary or unreasonable or discriminatory

Contention of candidate to the effect that to deny admission to him from among more than 2,87,000 students, the Board manipulated the process of fixing cut-off marks, was too far-fetched and difficult to accept, apart from the fact that there was no iota of material to support such a contention

Similar procedure for the entrance examination had also been adopted in the year 2000 and 2001

Object of the entire exercise was to ensure a balanced selection among the candidates who participated in the examination

No grounds existed for the court to interfere with the procedure, even if it was not accurate or efficient, in the absence of mala fides or arbitrariness or violation of law

Appeal was dismissed accordingly.