Allahabad High Court
Ved Prakash Tripathi vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 17 July, 2019
Author: Pankaj Bhatia
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 48961 of 2017 Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh,Abhishek Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manish Goyal Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
The petitioner has filed the writ petition claiming the following relief:
Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to produce the entire record including attendance sheet, CCTV footage and answer sheet of Hindi and English Computer Type Test (Test 2) and Hindi and English Stenography Test (Test 3) of petitioner bearing Roll No. 114110591, Application No. 602 in the Stenographer Grade III (District Court) 2014 examination who appeared in the said examination on 23.5.2015 at the center fixed by the respondent at United College of Engineering and Research, Naini, Allahabad and evaluate the answer book of petitioner for Hindi & English Computer Type Test (Test 2) and Hindi and English Stenography Test (Test 3), if the petitioner got more than last selected candidate he may be declared successful for the post of Stenographer Grade III (District Court) 2014 in pursuance of Advertisement No. 01/Sub. Court/Stenographer/2014."
The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was initially shown to be absent in the examination.
The petitioner states that the petitioner had appeared in the Civil Court, Grade-III (District) Examination 2014. When the result was declared on the Website the name of the petitioner did not appear. It is stated that on 8.5.2017 the Examination Committee uploaded a Chart including minimum cut off marks for all categories. In the said Chart, as regards the petitioner, it was was shown "not appeared" whereas the petitioner appeared in the examination.
In the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner had appeared in the English Stenographer Test, Hindi Stenographer Test, English Typing and Hindi Typing Test and after computation of his final scores, it was found that the petitioner has secured a total of 79.04 marks in the English Stenographer Test and 81.31 in the Hindi Stenographer Test while the minimum cut of marks for the General Category candidates was 95.91 for English Stenographer Test and 104.29 for Hindi Stenographer Test. Thus, the marks obtained by the petitioner were less than the final cut-off marks prescribed for General Category candidates, hence the petitioner could not be included in the final selection list.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the content of counter affidavit have been refuted. He further states that the same agency had conducted another examination in which the petitioner had got 23.72 marks out of 25 marks in Hindi Typing Test and 25 marks out of 25 marks in English Typing Test. It is thus argued that the marks awarded to the petitioner have not been calculated properly.
I am afraid that the said submission does not merit acceptance as scope of judicial review is very limited and cannot be used to evaluate the marks given by the agency which is best suited unless there are allegations of mala fide in the present case, there is being no such allegations. The argument is not acceptable.
The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.7.2019 Puspendra