Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ravi Gill And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 4 May, 2023

Author: Suvir Sehgal

Bench: Suvir Sehgal

                                                   Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064478




                                                          2023:PHHC:064478
CWP-3895-2021                             -1-


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH

(233)                                                     CWP-3895-2021
                                                 Date of decision:- 04.05.2023

Ravi Gill and others                                 ...Petitioners
                                Versus
State of Haryana and others                          ...Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

Present:- Mr. Pardeep Kumar Sehrawat, Advocate
          for the petitioners.

          Mr. Harish Rathee, Senior DAG, Haryana
          for respondent No.1.

          Mr. Amaninder Preet, Advocate
          for respondent No.2.

                ****

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral)

1. By way of present petition, petitioners have inter-alia sought issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Computer Proficiency Test (CPT) result dated 11.02.2021, Annexure P-4, and for directing the respondents to re-check and revised the result of the candidates.

2. In response to notice issued by this Court, separate replies have been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2. In its response, respondent No.2 has submitted as under:-

"06 In reply to Para No.6 it is submitted that the result of the Computer Proficiency Test was declared on 11.02.2021 vide Notice No. 60/S.S.S.C wherein name of the petitioners were shown in the list of candidates who have not qualified the Computer Proficiency Test. Mrs. Shilpa has scored 00 marks 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 06-05-2023 04:23:54 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064478 2023:PHHC:064478 CWP-3895-2021 -2- and other remaining petitioners have scored 02 marks in Spreadsheet Test. The qualifying marks for the Spreadsheet Test was 04 (i.e. 40% of total marks). It is further submitted that there were clear instructions in the question paper itself that all questions carry 2 marks and instructions are there in the question paper that no marks will be given for partly correct or incomplete answer. Furthermore, it was instructed that all answers must contain accurate figures in consonance with figures provided in question No.01 and if, the final answer's figures are not correct, then marks will not be awarded merely on account of application of correct formula and in the light of the aforesaid instructions the answer sheets of petitioners were evaluated and marks were awarded accordingly and further results were declared. 07 In reply to Para No.7, it is submitted that total 846 candidates were called for Checking of Original Testimonials/Interaction vide Notice No.60/S.S.S.C. dated 11.02.2021 and as the petitioners had not qualified the Computer Proficiency Test as they have not followed the instructions given in the question paper they could not qualify, hence, they were not called for Checking of Original Testimonials/Interaction.
08 In reply to Para No.8, it is submitted that the petitioners namely Sh. Ravi Gill, Ms. Kanwar Preet Kaur, Sh. Ajay Singh Chahal, Sh. Paras and Sh. Mohit Sharma had submitted a representation dated 15.02.2021 requesting therein to recheck or provide printout of their CPT (Excel Sheet). The same was declined by the Authorities as there is no provision of re-checking of Answer Sheets/providing the printouts of the same as the selection process was underway at that time. The aforesaid decision was communicated to the above said petitioners through E-mail."

3. As the petitioners have failed to score the minimum required 40% qualifying marks, there is no merit in the petition.

4. Petition is dismissed.



                                           (SUVIR SEHGAL)
04.05.2023                                      JUDGE
Kamal
         Whether Speaking/Reasoned                     Yes/No
         Whether Reportable                            Yes/No


Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:064478 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 06-05-2023 04:23:54 :::