Jharkhand High Court
Ashutosh Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand Through The Chief ... on 20 June, 2024
Author: S. N. Pathak
Bench: S.N. Pathak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 3264 of 2024
Ashutosh Kumar Singh ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Ranchi.
2. The Jharkhand Public Service Commission through the Secretary,
Ranchi.
3. The Chairman, Jharkhand Public Service Commission, Ranchi.
4. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Public Service Commission,
Ranchi.
... ... Respondents
------
CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Suresh Prajapati, Advocate Mr. Surya Narayan Sahu, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG-III For the Resp-JPSC : Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate
-----
4/ 20.06.2024 Heard.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction upon the respondents-JPSC, to evaluate his Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) answer sheet of Paper-I, which relates to appointment on Class-II posts pursuant to Advertisement No. 01/2024 (Jharkhand Combined Civil Services Competitive Examination, 2023), so that he could appear in the Mains examination which is scheduled to be held from 22.06.2024 onwards, as the petitioner has obtained more marks than the cut off under the unreserved category as per his own calculation based on revised answer key uploaded by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission.
3. At the very outset, Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-JPSC submits that exactly same and identical issue fell for consideration before this Court in W.P.(S) No. 2909 of 2024 (Mayank Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.) and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and discussing the various judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court and by this Court as well as other High Courts, this Court has been pleased to dismiss the said writ petition. Hence, there is no need to interfere in the matter by this Court once again.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also admits this position.
15. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, it appears that exactly same and similar issue has already been decided by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 2909 of 2024, decided on 19.06.2024. It also appears that after elaborating the factual aspects and discussing the judgments cited by the parties, this Court in paragraph-26 of the said judgment of W.P.(S) No. 2909 of 2024 has in clear words observed, which reads as follows:-
"26.In view of discussions made herein above, it can comfortably be said that the error committed by the petitioner in darkening the wrong circle in the column of roll number in OMR sheet of Paper-I, which determines the identity of the petitioner, cannot be said to be minor in nature. The petitioner, who appeared in the examination was a mature student and was to be appointed as Deputy Collector, Dy. Superintendent of Police and other high ranking officers of the State Government and it was expected from him to read the instructions very carefully before bubbling the OMR sheet relating to his roll number, registration number etc. The entry was made inaccurately, due to which the scanner machine could not read the same resulting into rejection of his candidature. The sympathy or compassion has no role to play in such type of cases and hence, the plea of leniency and sympathetic consideration is not accepted to this Court."
6. In view of the aforesaid facts, nothing more is required to be adjudicated in the present writ petition separately. As such, the present writ petition is accordingly dismissed in the same streamline as observed in paragraph-26 of the judgment rendered in W.P.(S) No. 2909 of 2024.
(Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.) R.Kr.
2