Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 957 of 2019 Petitioner :- Husnara Tyagi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Shukla,Anand Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,M.N. Singh
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri Anand Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent no.1 and Sri M.N.Singh for respondent nos.2 and 3.
The petitioner appeared in the preliminary examination for the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Examination, 2018 pursuant to the advertisement dated 11.9.2018 issued by the U.P. Public Service Commission.
The petitioner has filed this petition seeking a direction upon the U.P. Public Service Commission to produce the answer-sheets/mark-sheets of the Law and General Study of the petitioner of the aforesaid examination and for a direction to decide his representation dated 15.1.2019.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that according to the key answers published by the Commission, the petitioner ought to have obtained a total 210 marks, but instead he has only been awarded 201 marks, just two short of the last selected candidates of the General Category.
The petitioner could ask for the answer sheet or any other document relating to the said examination from the Commission under the Right to Information Act and as such it is not appropriate for this Court to issue any direction in this regard by passing the remedy so available to the petitioner.
As far as representation of the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner is a student/a candidate in the examination and he cannot be made a judge of his own cause so as to accept that if according to him he ought to have secured 210 marks then award of lessor marks is incorrect. The copy of the preliminary examinations are examined through computer and, the chances of mistake is very rare. It is also pertinent to mention here that in the preliminary examination there was negative marks also and as such no candidate can be sure shot that if he has attempted certain questions correctly, then he should obtain particular marks. The marks secured by the candidate depends not only upon the correct answers, but upon the incorrect answers also. In such a situation, the argument that the petitioner ought to have received 210 marks in the preliminary examination is too far fetched and cannot be accepted.
The writ petition has no merit and as such is dismissed.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 AKJ