Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2150 (JHR)

Subhash Kumar v. State of Jharkhand

2017-12-13

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2017
ORDER : RAJESH SHANKAR, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to publish the petitioner's Main's Examination result of 5th Combined Civil Service Exam, 2015 conducted by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as "JPSC") pursuant to Adv. No. 06 of 2013 which has not been published on the ground of wrong shadowing of Optical Mark Recognition (in short OMR) sheet in General Hindi paper. 3. The factual background of the case as stated in the writ petition is that pursuant to the Advertisement No. 06/2013, the petitioner applied for 5th Combined Civil Services (PT) Examination as SC category candidate. After being successful in Preliminary Test, the petitioner was issued admit card for Mains Examination and thereafter, he appeared in the Mains Examination, but was declared unsuccessful in the marks statement of 5th Combined Civil Service Exam, 2015 on the ground of wrong shadowing of OMR sheet of General Hindi paper which gives rise to filing of the present writ petition. 4. Mr. Indrajeet Sinha, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the OMR sheet of General Hindi, the column for paper code was provided, but in fact there was no such paper code mentioned in the General Hindi question paper and the admit card. The petitioner got confused and asked the Invigilator about the paper code, but he could not help the petitioner and suggested him to do the needful as per his own choice. The petitioner in bona fide manner marked "1" in the column of the paper code in the OMR sheet of General Hindi subject and due to the said technical reason, the said OMR sheet of the petitioner has been rejected though marks of all the subjects were calculated manually. It is further submitted that the petitioner being a SC candidate has obtained total 703 marks in the Mains Examination which is much higher than the cut off marks of the General Candidate i.e., 644 marks. The petitioner has got 51 marks in Hindi, but due to technical mistake of wrong shadowing of OMR sheet, he has been declared unsuccessful. The petitioner also filed representation before the respondents on 16.05.2016 for reconsideration of his case, but no action has been taken till date. 5. Per contra, Mr. The petitioner has got 51 marks in Hindi, but due to technical mistake of wrong shadowing of OMR sheet, he has been declared unsuccessful. The petitioner also filed representation before the respondents on 16.05.2016 for reconsideration of his case, but no action has been taken till date. 5. Per contra, Mr. Sanjay Piparwal, the learned counsel for the respondent-JPSC submits that JPSC is a constitutional body and it follows the guidelines and instructions issued for conducting the examination and publication of the result and cannot deviate from the same. It is further submitted that in the Admit Card itself it was specifically mentioned that OMR sheet would be processed electronically and OMR scanning machine would reject OMR sheet, in which Roll No., Centre Code, Subject Code and Paper Code are not properly and correctly shadowed. It is also submitted that the petitioner's answers sheet of General Hindi paper was rejected by the OMR scanning machine on account of wrong shadowing of paper code due to which the petitioner was not declared successful in the main examination. It is also submitted that pursuant to the Advertisement No. 06/2013, the names of successful candidates have already been recommended to the State Government and have already been appointed. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on going through the documents available on record, it appears that the OMR sheet of General Hindi paper of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground of wrong shadowing of the paper code. I have perused the instructions given in the Admit Card of Mains Examination annexed by the respondent-JPSC as Annexure-E to the counter affidavit. The column No. 4 under the heading of "Instruction for candidates" is relevant for consideration of this case and as such, the same is reproduced hereinbelow:- 4. OMR (Optical Mark Recognition) answer sheet will be processed electronically. As such invalidation of answer sheet due to incomplete/incorrect filling/shadowing of the bubbles of OMR answer sheet, will be the sole responsibility of the candidate. OMR Scanning machine will reject OMR sheet in which Roll No. and Booklet series are not properly and correctly shadowed in Part-III. 7. By way of the above instruction, the candidates including the petitioner were clearly instructed that OMR machine will reject OMR sheet if the Roll Number and Booklet Series are not properly and correctly shadowed. OMR Scanning machine will reject OMR sheet in which Roll No. and Booklet series are not properly and correctly shadowed in Part-III. 7. By way of the above instruction, the candidates including the petitioner were clearly instructed that OMR machine will reject OMR sheet if the Roll Number and Booklet Series are not properly and correctly shadowed. It was further instructed that invalidation of answer sheet due to incomplete/incorrect filling/shadowing of the bubbles of OMR answer sheet will be the sole responsibility of the candidate. As such, it was the prime duty of the petitioner to fill the OMR sheet as per the instructions and if the petitioner himself has committed any fault, no direction can be issued by the Writ Court in his favour. 8. It is worth to mention that in a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 5803 of 2016 filed against the rejection of the candidature due to wrong shadowing of the bubbles of OMR sheet in 5th Combined Civil Service (Mains Examination), 2015, a Bench of this Court dismissed the said writ petition vide order dated 09.01.2017 with following observation: "The petitioner, in paragraph No. 7 of the writ petition, has himself admitted that he darkened the bubble under the Centre Code wrongly. It is admitted at Bar that the entire system of evaluation of OMR sheet is fully computerised and no manual interference is permitted. It is stated that in the question-booklet/OMR sheet etc. instruction was printed that, OMR answer sheet will be processed electronically and OMR Scanning machine will reject OMR sheet in which Roll number, Centre Code, Subject Code, Booklet Series and Booklet number are not properly and correctly shadowed. The OMR sheet of the petitioner which was wrongly darkened at one place, obviously was rejected by the computer and while so, no direction can be issued to the respondent-Jharkhand Public Service Commission to re-assess or to accept the marks which was published on the website, wrongly." 9. The said order was challenged by the candidate in L.P.A. No. 55 of 2017 which was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.09.2017 with following observation: "........... The said order was challenged by the candidate in L.P.A. No. 55 of 2017 which was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.09.2017 with following observation: "........... If there is an error on the part of the candidates in giving these details through darkening the circles, candidates are bound to suffer because first process is being done by OMR (Optical Mark Recognition) scanning machine and then Roll Number, Paper Code, Centre Code and such other details are being scrutinized by machine and not by manually i.e. by human-beings. Few may be advantageous and few may be disadvantageous. Candidates are bound to do practice at home. This case is no exception to such type of error committed by the candidates in inserting the Center Code by darkening wrong circle by their pencils. There is inbuilt demand of accuracy from the candidates that at least they must know how to write technically the details about their Roll Number, Centre Code etc. by darkening the circles. Examination means to check the accuracy of the candidates. We see no reason to take any other view than what has been taken by the learned Single Judge while deciding W.P.(S) No. 5803 of 2016 vide judgment and order dated 09.01.2017 mainly for the reasons that: (a) Darkening of the circles are part and parcel of the examination process. (b) Process of the data of the candidates is through OMR scanning machine and they are bound to give correct data to the machine through darkening the circles. (c) In Condition No. 4 of the Admit Card, it is clearly mentioned that OMR (Optical Mark Recognition) answer sheet will be processed electronically. As such invalidation of answer sheet due to incomplete/incorrect, filling/shadowing of the bubbles on OMR sheet, will be the sole responsibility of the candidate. OMR scanning machine will reject OMR sheet in which Roll No., Centre Code, Subject Code and Paper Code are not properly and correctly shadowed in Part-III. In view of this condition, candidates are bound to be accurate. This Court cannot allow their lethargic approach; otherwise, there will be several candidates, who have committed error, will come to the Court and all the answer sheets are to be verified/checked/processed manually. Now-a-days, partly such type of answer sheets are being processed by machines and partly by manual. In view of this condition, candidates are bound to be accurate. This Court cannot allow their lethargic approach; otherwise, there will be several candidates, who have committed error, will come to the Court and all the answer sheets are to be verified/checked/processed manually. Now-a-days, partly such type of answer sheets are being processed by machines and partly by manual. Days are not far away, when everything will be processed by machines. (d) Even otherwise also, result of 5th Combined Civil Services (Mains) Examination-2015 has already been declared in February, 2016, as submitted by the counsel for respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 5. Candidates have been selected and by now, they have already been appointed and they are not joined as party-respondents." 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner has vociferously argued that the paper codes of General Studies, Anthropology and Geography, were written in the Admit Card as well as in the question paper but the paper code of General Hindi Paper was neither mentioned in the Admit Card nor in the question paper. Under the said circumstance, the petitioner mentioned the paper code as General Hindi Paper Code-1 in the OMR answer-sheet of General Hindi subject, which cannot be said to be any mistake committed by the petitioner while filling the OMR sheet of General Hindi subject. The said argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted for the reason that the General Hindi paper was a single paper, whereas there were two papers each in General Studies, Anthropology and Geography. Accordingly, there was no occasion for the JPSC to mention the Paper Code with subject General Hindi whereas, in the subjects i.e., General Studies, Anthropology and Geography, Paper-I and Paper-II were mentioned having two papers each for the said subjects. It is a matter of common prudence that if there is single subject, the same cannot be followed by paper number i.e., Paper-I. The stand of the respondent-JPSC is that the OMR sheet of the petitioner for the subject General Hindi was rejected by the OMR scanning machine on account of wrong shadowing of the paper code due to which the petitioner was not declared successful in the Mains Examination appears to be justified as the Admit Card issued to the petitioner (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) also does not mention any paper code with the subject General Hindi. The petitioner should have reasonably thought that the single paper of General Hindi subject cannot be termed as General Hindi-I. So far the other argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner despite being a Scheduled Caste candidate has scored more marks than candidates of general category and, therefore, his candidature should be considered, is also not acceptable in the present factual context where the candidature of the petitioner itself has been rejected due to wrong shadowing of the OMR sheet of General Hindi Paper despite specific instruction given in the Admit Card. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I see no reason to allow the prayer of the petitioner. The writ petition being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.