Re-evaluation of answer sheets is not permissible as per guidelines of Jharkhand Public Service Commission – Jharkhand high court
A petition was filed requesting the court to allow the petitioner to give mains exams of JPSC on the basis that the answer sheet was not properly checked and the petitioner is qualified to sit in the exam the court heard the argument of both the parties and dismissed the petition on the basis the re-evaluation of answer sheet is not permissible and the petition was heard and dismissed by a single judge bench of THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK in the case of Kumari Kanchan Mehta versus The State of Jharkhand and Ors. ( W.P.(S). No. 5111 of 2021)
The petitioner applied for the exam under Backward Classes fulfilling all requirements and was allotted the Roll no. and have given the exam at the allotted center. The respondent published the answer sheet and results and the name of the petitioners was not in the results list and was not qualified to give the main exams. after the announcement of results, the petitioner approached the court for redressal of grievances.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioner had calculated her marks and got 252 marks which are above the cutoff marks and she should have been declared successful and should be allowed for mains examination. it has been further alleged that the OMR sheet was correctly marked and it appears that due to some fault or mistake committed by the OMR-scanning machine, the total marks obtained by the petitioner is 250 in place 252, which is wrong and because of the fault of the respondent the petitioner cannot be allowed to suffer.
The learned counsel on behalf of the respondents submitted that the petitioner has secured 250 marks whereas, the last selected candidate has secured 252 marks and this is the reason for not showing the petitioner named in the answer sheet and there is no illegality or any infirmity on the part of the respondent-JPSC. the counsel further argues that if there is any mistake in correction then the petitioner should have applied JPSC not directly approach the court. the learned counsel further relied on the case of Aashish Kumar Chaurasiya Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors. (W.P.S. No. 568 of 2018) and LPA No. 297 of 2018 (Sanchit Kumar Singh & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.) hence, no inference is warranted in such writ petition.
The court in the matter is of the view that The petitioner admittedly has not filed any application before the respondent JPSC for scrutiny of her marks obtained in Preliminary Examination and there is no rule or regulations as per the JPSC for the re-evaluation of answer sheet and relied on the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Jagdish Chandra Jat (D.B. CW No. 12323 of 2020) shows that OMR is read electronically and cannot be evaluated again. Hence the writ petition is dismissed without any merit.
Judgment reviewed by Naveen Sharma