Summary: Four candidates, including Kartiki Awantika, challenged the Maharashtra Public Service Commission's evaluation process for the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate exams. They demanded a second look at their answer sheets and access to them, saying the grading was not fair.
On December 24, 2025, the Bombay High Court, with Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad, gave their decision on the requests made by Kartiki Awantika and others. These candidates had taken the 2022 exams but didn't meet the score needed to pass.
The petitioners, including Kartiki, Shruti Hemant Wade, Patil Naresh Dongar, and Amit Arun Londhe, wanted their answer sheets to be graded again. They argued that the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) had graded their papers in a careless way, which robbed them of a fair chance.
"The way the examiners graded was quite random and unfair," claimed the petitioners.
The petitioners argued that the MPSC's refusal to provide answer sheets violated their basic rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Indian Constitution. They referred to past court cases to support their demand for openness and fairness in the grading process.
The court looked at past decisions, including "Tirtha Sarathi Mukherjee," where the Supreme Court allowed candidates to see their answer sheets to prevent "serious unfairness." The court agreed that while there is no legal right to have exams re-graded, special cases might need it.
"The broad power under Article 226 may still be available even if there is no rule for re-grading," noted the court.
The court allowed the petitioners to look at their answer sheets, following the principles of fairness and justice. However, it stressed that any uncertainties should favor the examiners to keep the trust in competitive exams strong.
