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]

Jharkhand High Court

Sharjil Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr on 30 June, 2015

                                             1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI                          
                                 W. P. (C) No. 1584 of 2015
                                              ­­­
          SHARJIL  KHAN S/O SRI ADTI KHAN, RESIDENT OF SECOND 
          FLOOR, KAMLA ARCADE, JUBILEE ROAD, GORAKHPUR (UP) 
                                                 ......       PETITIONER
                                  VERSUS

          1. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
          2. JHARKHAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, CIRCULAR 
          ROAD, RANCHI, P.O.­ G.P.O., P.S.­ KOTWALI ....  RESPONDENTS
                     
          CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
                                      ­­­          
          FOR THE PETITIONER          : MR. J.S. TRIPATHI, ADV. 
          FOR THE JPSC                : MR. SANJAY PIPRAWALL, ADV. 
                                      ­­­          

05/ 30.06.2015

Seeking   a   direction   upon   the   respondent   no.2   for  evaluation   of   the   paper   for   Civil   Judge,   Junior   Division  Examination­2014, the present writ petition has been filed.

2. Pursuant   to   Advertisement   No.04   of   2013   for   Civil  Judge,   Junior   Division   Examination­2014,   the   petitioner   also  submitted   application   and   he   was   alloted   roll   number   being,  41321124.   The petitioner appeared in the examination however,  his   result   was   not   declared   and   therefore,   he   approached   the  respondent­JPSC.     Pursuant   to   his   application   dated   24.02.2015,  the   petitioner   was   permitted   to   peruse   his   answer­sheet   on  25.03.2015.    The petitioner has claimed that on 25.03.2015, the  petitioner could know that the answer­sheet of the petitioner was  rejected on  hyper­technical ground that the petitioner has failed to  shadow the roll number in the OMR­sheet.  

3. The   learned   counsel   for   the   JPSC   submits   that   the  2 applicants were duly instructed to fill­up the application form and  the  OMR­sheet  carefully.   It  has been indicated to the  applicants  that   the   OMR­sheet/answer­sheet  will  be   processed electronically  and   as   such,   invalidation   of   the   answer­sheet   due   to  incomplete/incorrect   shadowing   of   the   bubbles   in   OMR­sheet  would be sole responsibility of the applicants.  It is thus submitted  that   on   account   of   aforesaid   mistake   of   the   petitioner,   the  respondent­JPSC   cannot   re­evaluate   the   answer­sheet   of   the  petitioner.     It   is   further   submitted   that   the   evaluation   of   the  OMR­sheet is done through a fully computerized system.

4. From the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner has  not denied that he failed to correctly shadow the OMR­sheet insofar  as, his roll number is concerned.   The admit card itself discloses  that the candidates were cautioned while filling­up the applications  and darkening the OMR­sheet.  

5. Keeping in view the stand of the respondent­JPSC that  no manual interference is permitted, I am not inclined to interfere  in the matter and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.   (Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) R.K.