View of Karnataka High Court. | Photo credit: File photo
A bench of the Karnataka High Court has now permitted the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS) to take a suitable decision to provide key or model answers to subjective questions during the MBBS course answer evaluation without being influenced by certain observations of a single judge which were binding in nature.
Not a firm opinion
“We make it clear that nothing contained in the single judge’s order can be construed as a firm opinion on whether it is necessary to provide examiners with model answer keys containing key phrases and key terms for evaluating answers to subjective questions. The university is at liberty to take an appropriate decision uninfluenced by observations,” the court observed.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Poonacha passed the order on the appeals filed by RGUHS challenging the judgment dated July 30, 2025 passed by the single judge.
“In our view, it would not be appropriate for this court to examine how the answers to questions in a particular subject matter are required to be evaluated, as this must necessarily be left to the knowledge and wisdom of experts,” the court said.
The Court noted that the Syndicate and Academic Council of RGUHS had already considered the issue of providing key or model answers even for subjective questions and that the National Medical Commission (NMC) had initially supported the provision of key answers containing “key words” and “key phrases/terms” to be found in the students’ answer scripts as they would serve as a basis/guide for assessors/examinations.
NMC notice
However, the NMC subsequently changed its stand and argued that subjective answers cannot be evaluated only on the basis of key phrases or concepts used in students’ answers, the bench pointed out.
Noting the RGUHS’s argument that “answers to medical science questions are assessed based on students’ understanding and knowledge. Their knowledge cannot be assessed on the anvil of whether they used key phrases or terms in the language used to express their answers,” the court said this claim was not “insubstantial.”
In the directions issued by the single judge, asking the RGUHS to forward the answer scripts of the petitioners-students who were in the first year of the MBBS trial in 2023-2024 for third evaluation, the court said that there is no provision for evaluation by a third assessor in the 2022 order governing the Central Evaluation Program of all undergraduate theory courses in all undergraduate science courses.
“It is not for the Court to develop a method for evaluating answer scripts and to replace the method laid down by the Ordinance. The evaluation of answer scripts is covered by a statutory provision and therefore it is neither appropriate nor permissible for the Court to issue directions regarding evaluation which are contrary to law,” the bench said, setting aside the order passed by the single judge for the third evaluation.
Published – 23 Feb 2026 21:49 IST
