Orissa High Court
Jagabandhu Patra vs Odisha Public Service .... Opposite ... on 17 May, 2024
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.13118 of 2020
Jagabandhu Patra .... Petitioner
Represented By Adv.
Mr. B. N. Parida
-versus-
Odisha Public Service .... Opposite Parties
Commission, Cuttack & Anr.
Represented By AGA
Mr. Ch. S. Mishra
Mr. A. Behera, Adv.
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
ORDER
Order 17.05.2024 No.
15. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction from this Court to the Opposite Party No.1 to produce his answer papers for Odia Language paper and English paper for the Odisha Civil Services (Mains) Examination, 2018-19. The Petitioner further prays for a direction to the Opposite Party No.1 for re-evaluation of the answer scripts.
Page 1 of 4
// 2 //
3. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in Ran Vijay Singh & Ors. V. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.1.
5. Mr. Behera, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.1/OPSC submits that the OPSC has supplied the photo copies of the answer scripts for Odia Language and English papers vide letter No.3612 dated 15.07.2020. The said letter provides that "the request of the candidates for re-evaluation/re-checking of Answer Scripts/Answer Books relating to the Examination conducted by the OPSC shall not be entertained".
6. He further submits that though the re-scrutiny/re- addition of answer scripts is permissible, the Opposite Party No.1 does not permit re-evaluation/re-checking of the answer scripts. On 27.06.2017, vide notice No.1009, the aforesaid was communicated to all concerned which has been extracted hereinbelow:-
"This is for information of all concerned that as per Ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Pramod Kumar Srivastava vs. Chairman, Bihar PSC, Patna and others (vide Civil Appeal No. 5046 of 2004) decided on 06.08.2004 there shall be no 1 (2018) 1 SCC (L&S) 297 Page 2 of 4 // 3 // re-evaluation/ re-checking of Answer Scripts of any examination conducted by the Odisha Public Service Commission. Thus, request of the candidates for re-
evaluation/ re-checking of Answer Scripts/ Answer Books relating to the Examinations conducted by the OPSC shall not be entertained."
7. He further submits that all the answers given by the Petitioner in the English paper was evaluated by the examiner engaged by the OPSC and found that there was no mistake in the addition of marks and the said paper has been properly scrutinized.
8. He further submits that the Supreme Court in the case of Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission2 has disapproved the practice of seeking re-evaluation of answer scripts in the absence of any rules for the same. The Apex Court has further held that passing directions for re- evaluation of answer scripts would unnecessarily delay the entire recruitment process since every candidate will naturally prefer to seek re-evaluation. Moreover, it was held that a uniform and centralized evaluation process is a necessary concomitant of any competitive selection process since there can be 2 (2004) 6 SCC 714 Page 3 of 4 // 4 // variation in the standard of marks awarded by different examiners. He further submits that similar sentiment has been echoed by another judgment by the Supreme Court in Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences v. Dr. Yerra Trinadh & Ors.3
9. This Court went through the answer scripts provided by the Opposite Party No.1/OPSC and found that the Petitioner has scored less than the qualifying marks. The qualifying marks for the said paper is 90 marks for the SC candidate and the Petitioner has secured only 55 marks out of 100 marks.
10. Considering the facts and submissions made and on perusal of all the documents available in this Writ Petition, this Court cannot entertain the prayer of the present Petitioner.
11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge Sumitra Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK 3 Designation: Jr. Stenographer2022 LiveLaw (SC) 909; Para 9 Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 20-May-2024 17:53:25 Page 4 of 4