Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 327 (JHR)

Sita Ram Prasad v. State of Jharkhand

2014-03-03

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2014
Order Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P.S. No. 1475 of 2012 alleging that after the inspection of his answer sheets of the 3rd J.P.S.C. Combined Civil Services Examination under the Right to Information Act he found that concerned papers of the General Studies Paper I and Paper II were not properly evaluated. The said writ petition was disposed of on the basis of submission made by the J.P.S.C that if there is any such error, the same shall be immediately taken up and fresh and corrected mark sheet shall be issued to the petitioner. Accordingly, J.P.S.C was directed to correct the admitted errors and issue a fresh mark sheet within 3 weeks vide judgment dated 3.10.2012 (Annexure-7). In the present writ application, petitioner has made prayer to publish the result of the petitioner on the basis of marks of General Studies Paper I and II which has been rechecked after passing of the judgment in the case earlier. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon his representation preferred on 1.3.2012(Annexure-6) to show the discrepancy occurred in the answer sheets of the General Studies Paper I and II. 3. The respondents have stated that after the order passed in this case the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (J.P.S.C.) has got rechecked all the answer sheets of General Studies Paper I and II through the concerned examinor as also the head examinor and after rechecking they have corrected the discrepancy and submitted the report to the effect indicated in the counter affidavit which is as follows:- General Studies Paper -I 1) Q.no. -7(b) marks awarded Zero(00) 2) Q.no.-8(d) Answer made by the candidate is not answer of Q. no. 8(d) but for 10(d) which is not required. The candidate is required to answer only two questions in group C. He has answered Q no. -9 so answer of Q.no.-10(d) is extra answer, which is not calculated. 3) Q.no.-9(d) Marks awarded is 06 but not transcripted in the front page. Marks awarded is 23 instead of 29 Q.no.-9(d) is not answered after Q.no.9(c) but before Q.no.-9(a) i.e. in previous page. Total marks of General Studies Paper-1 was earlier 84 (eighty four) now it is 90(ninety). General Studies Paper-II A) 06(six) marks awarded in Q.no.-1(d) which has remained unevaluated and not included in totaling. B) 02(two) marks awarded in Q.no. Marks awarded is 23 instead of 29 Q.no.-9(d) is not answered after Q.no.9(c) but before Q.no.-9(a) i.e. in previous page. Total marks of General Studies Paper-1 was earlier 84 (eighty four) now it is 90(ninety). General Studies Paper-II A) 06(six) marks awarded in Q.no.-1(d) which has remained unevaluated and not included in totaling. B) 02(two) marks awarded in Q.no. 1(C) which the examinee had wrongly mentioned had wrongly mentioned Q.no-2(C) and subsequently added in totaling of marks. Total marks of General Studies Paper-II was earlier 97(ninety seven) now it came to 105( one hundred five) marks. 4. Therefore, it is submitted that J.P.S.C have corrected all the admitted errors and issued a fresh revised mark sheet to the petitioner vide letter dated 21.1.2013(Annexure-8) to the writ application. The petitioner has obtained 90 marks after rechecking in the General Studies Paper I and 105 marks in General Studies Paper-II, while earlier he had got 84 and 97 marks respectively. After calculating the total marks secured by the petitioner i.e. 729 along with marks of interview, he got 814.8 marks. However, petitioner being in the category of Other Backward Classes was found to have secured less marks than the marks obtained by the last recommended candidate by the J.P.S.C. for appointment in any service under the 3rd Combined Civil Services Examination. Therefore, he is not eligible for appointment and no recommendation can be made in his favour. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however pressed for rechecking/ re-evaluation of the papers once again stating that concerned examinor who had earlier examined the papers and the head examinor have themselves examined the answer sheets of the petitioner and they obviously cannot be expected to accept their own mistake. 6. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through relevant materials on record. It is true that on the last occasion when the petitioner had approached this Court, after inspection of his answer sheet of General Studies Paper I and II, the respondents were directed to undertake an exercise to correct the admitted errors and issue fresh mark sheet to the petitioner. There was no direction, as such for re-evaluation of the papers which is also not permissible in a competitive examination held under the J.P.S.C as the statute does not provide as such. There was no direction, as such for re-evaluation of the papers which is also not permissible in a competitive examination held under the J.P.S.C as the statute does not provide as such. After the rechecking of the General Studies Paper I and II of the petitioner, in view of the judgment passed earlier in the case of the petitioner, it was found that petitioner has fetched 90 and 105 marks respectively in the said papers. Explanation of discrepancy in the earlier rechecking as also the petitioner's error in making answer to certain questions also have been indicated in the report which has been quoted herein above. The petitioner, after the last rechecking has been found to have secured 814.8 marks including 729 in the written test, which, however is less than the marks fetched by the last recommended candidate under the O.B.C category in the said examination. Therefore, his name was not recommended. 7. In the wake of such facts as indicated herein above, no fresh grounds are made by the petitioner for any rechecking of the said papers and the submission made by the respondents in the counter affidavit have also not been refuted by him by filing any rejoinder. In these facts and circumstances, I do not find any merit in the writ application to further direct the respondents to publish the result of the petitioner, though he has not secured the cut of marks as such for being recommended for appointment in any service under the J.P.S.C. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. Petition dismissed.