It is for RGUHS and experts to decide on providing key or model answers to subjective questions in MBBS course exams: Karnataka High Court

A division bench of the High Court of Karnataka has now given liberty to the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS) to take an appropriate decision on providing key or model answers to subjective questions during the evaluation of answer scripts of the MBBS course, without being influenced by certain observations made by a single judge, which were binding in nature.

Not firm opinion

“We clarify that nothing stated in the single judge’s order is to be construed as a firm opinion on whether model answer keys containing key phrases and key terms are required to be provided to the examiners for the evaluation of answers to subjective questions. The University is at liberty to take an appropriate decision uninfluenced by the observations,” the bench observed.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C.M. Poonacha passed an order on the appeals filed by the RGUHS, which had challenged the July 30, 2025 judgement passed by the single judge.

“In our view, it would not be apposite for this Court to examine as to how answers to questions in a particular subject are required to be evaluated as it must necessarily be left to the knowledge and wisdom of the experts,” the bench said.

The Court noted that the RGUHS’s Syndicate and Academic Councils have already deliberated the issue of providing key or model answers even to subjective questions, and that the National Medical Commission (NMC) was initially in support of providing key answers containing “key words” and “key phrases/terms” that must be found in students’ answer scripts as it would serve as the basis/guide for the evaluators/examiners when awarding marks.

NMC’s alert

However, the NMC subsequently altered its stand and contended that subjective answers cannot be evaluated merely on the basis of key phrases or terms used in the answers given by the students, the bench pointed out.

Noticing RGUHS’s argument that “the answers to medical science questions are evaluated based on students’ understanding and knowledge. Their knowledge cannot be evaluated on the anvil, whether they have used key phrases or terms in the language used to express their answers, the bench said this contention is “not insubstantial”.

On the directions issued by the single judge asking the RGUHS to refer the answer scripts of the petitioner-students, who were in the first year MBBS court of 2023-2024, for a third evaluation, the bench said that there is no provision for valuation by a third evaluator in the 2022 ordinance governing the Central Assessment Programme (CAP) for theory paper assessment in all under-graduate health science courses of the university.

“It is not open to this Court to evolve a method for evaluating answer scripts and to supplant the method provided under the ordinance. Evaluation of the answer scripts is covered by a statutory prescription, and therefore, it is neither apposite nor permissible for the Court to issue directions regarding evaluation which run contrary to the statute,” the bench said, while setting aside the order for a third evaluation issued by the single judge.